
Class t- ■ 



' '^ / 



Book 



\ L 



% ^ 



7 3i-^ ri. 



//a^ 



JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY STUDIES 

IN 

HiSTOEICAL AND POLITICAL SCIENCE 
HERBERT B. ADAMS, Editor 



History is past Politics and Politics are present History.— Freeman 



EXTRA VOLUME 
XV 



/ 



x.^ 



^J' 



SOUTHERN QUAKERS 



AND 



SLAVERY 






(p-y^ 



A Study in Institutional History 



By STEPHEN B. WEEKS, Ph.D. 

{University of North Carolina and Johns Hopkins University) 




baltimore 

The Johns Hopkins Press 

1896 






COPTKIOBT, laSfi, BT TH« JOIIMS HOPKINS PBS38. 






TH« PBItDK.VWALD CO., PRINTKIW, 
BALTIMURI. 



TO 

SADIE MANGUM LEACH WEEKS 

WHOSE LOVING SYMPATHY AND CONSTANT ASSISTANCE LIGHTENED 
FOR ME THE BURTHEN OF A DIFFICULT TASK 



PREFACE. 



The following study of Quakerism in the South has 
been entitled " Southern Quakers and Slavery," for the 
reason that slavery was the subject which differentiated 
Friends in the South from other religious bodies. It 
was opposition to slavery that made Southern Quak- 
erism what it was; without this opposition Quakers 
would have been comparatively unnoticed in the presence 
of larger and more powerful denominations. Again, 
these pages deal with the Society in Virginia, North Caro- 
lina, South Carolina, Georgia and Tennessee. It was not 
thought well to include the Baltimore Yearly Meetings, 
for the reason that these lie only in part in Maryland, and 
extending into Pennsylvania, where the emancipation sen- 
timent was strong, there was not the same heroism 
implied in opposition to slavery as in the more southern 
Yearly Meetings. Further, the Baltimore Yearly Meet- 
ings did not suffer so severely from the westward migra- 
'tion which was superinduced by slavery. The institution 
of slavery differentiates Quakers from other denomi- 
nations; the effects of slavery differentiate the meetings 
in Virginia, the Carolinas and Georgia from those to the 
northward, hence the title of this book and its geograph- 
ical limitations. 

As a rule the history of the earliest Southern Friends 
has been either misrepresented or ignored, or both. And 
the importance of that great wave of Quaker migration, 
rising in Pennsylvania, striking Maryland about 1725, 
and spending its dying power on the colonization of 
Georgia, 1770-75, seems never to have been duly appre- 
ciated. The same is largely true of that other wave of 
Quaker migration which began to rise in Virginia and 
the Carolinas during the closing decades of the eigh- 
teenth century, and, sweeping across the mountains for 
the next eighty years, planted some of the first settlements 
in the then new Northwest, and has since made that coun- 



\iii I 'n face. 

try the greatest strongliold of Quakerism in the world. 
These are some of the reasons that brought tlie writer, now 
five years since, to begin the study of Southern Quakerism. 
The writer is indebted to many parties for valuable 
assistance rendered in the preparation of this book. He 
desires to express his thanks to all who have assisted him 
in this undertaking; particularly would he mention Mr. 
Gilbert Cope of West Chester, Pa., Messrs. Frederick D. 
Stone and John W. Jordan of the Pennsylvania Historical 
Society Library, Dr. Colyer Meriwether and ]\Ir. George 
P. Pell of Washington City, Messrs. Kirk Brown and 
John C. Thomas and Miss E. T. King of Baltimore, 
Mr. John W. H. Porter of Portsmouth, Va., and Mr. 
Edmund W. James of Norfolk, Va., Col. Robert A. Brock 
of Richmond, Mr. Philip A. Bruce of the Virginia His- 
torical Society, Mr. Robert W. Carroll of Cincinnati, Mr. 
Timothy Nicholson of Richmond, Ind.. Mr. Josiah Nichol- 
son of Belvidere, N. C, Mrs. P. B. Hackney and Mr. Addison 
Coffin of Guilford College, N. C, Mr. Nathan H. Vestal 
of Yadkinville, N. C, and Mr. Albert W. Brown of Wood- 
land, N. C. He is especially grateful to Mr. Hugh W. 
Dixon of Snow Camp, N. C, to Prof. F. S. Blair of Guil- 
ford College, N. C, to Rev. Rufus King of Archdale. N. C, 
and to Prof. Eli M. Lamb of Baltimore, who all read much 
of the work, and to Dr. James Carey Thomas of Baltimore, 
who criticised parts of the same. The writer would 
acknowledge also his great obligations to Mr. Francis 
White of Baltimore for the deep interest he has shown in 
the work from its very inception, to Mr. Charles Roberts, 
member of the Common Council of Philadelphia, who, 
besides assisting him in other ways, placed the MS. corres- 
pondence of John Archdale at his service, and to Mr. 
George J. Scattcrgood, of Philadelphia, who not only 
secured him access to the early records of Philadelphia 
Yearly Meeting, and showed him the MS. correspondence 
of Thomas Scattergood. but also took the trouble to read 
over the whole of this volume while still in manuscript and 
to make valued criticisms on the same. 

WASIIIHOTriN. I). C. /}fC. I. iB.;^, 



CONTENTS. 



Chapter I. 
Introduction. 

Influeuce of Quakers on the Southern States 1 

Religious condition of England in the seventeenth century 2 

Rise of Quakerism in England 8 

The character and creed of Quakerism 4 

Chapter II. 
The Status of Dissent in the South. 

Status of Dissent in Virginia 7 

Dissent in the Carolinas under the Lords Proprietors ... 8 

Dissent in Georgia ; summary 11 

Chapter III. 

The Planting of Quakerism in Virginia and the Caro- 
linas. 

lizabeth Harris the first Quaker to visit Virginia .... 13 

Josiah Cole and Thomas Thurston arrive 14 

Persecutions begin 14 

Visits of Robinson, Hodgson, and Holder 15 

First Virginia lavs' against Quakers 16 

Persecutions under the law of 1663 18 

Visits from other traveling Friends 20 

Persecutions in Norfolk County 22 

John Porter, Sr., expelled from Virginia House of Bur- 
gesses ; his life 23 

Persecution of John Porter, Jr. ; his life 24 

Persecutions as gathered from records of Friends .... 25 

John Perrot in Virginia ; his influence 27 

John Burnyeat visits Virginia 28 

Scarborough's characterization of Quakers 29 

Fox and Edmundson visit America 29 

Edmundson visits Albemarle, novr North Carolina .... 31 

Settlers in North Carolina not religious refugees 32 

Arguments against the refugee theory 34 



X Contents. 

Edniundsou travelH iu Virgiuiii ; visits Gov. Berkeley . . 36 

Fox visits Virginia aud North Caroliua 37 

Edimiiidsou visits Virginia aud North Carolina in 1676-77 41 

John lioweter visits Virginia, 1678 43 

Troubles in Virginia and NortJi Carolina 43 

Organization of meetings in Virginia 46 

Organization of meetings in North Carolina 46 

Beginnings of Quakerism in South Carolina 49 

Chapter IV. 
John Akchdale and the Golden Age op Southern Qua- 

KKKISM. 
Importance of Archdale aud of the seventeenth century . 50 
Further organization and immigration in North Carolina . 50 
Visit of Wilson and Dickinson to Virginia and North Car- 
olina 51 

John Arclidale made Governor-General of Carolina ... 52 

His earl}- life ; object of his appointment ; his influence . 53 

Returns to England ; part of his family settle in Carolina 60 

His election to Parliament ; declines to take the oath . . 61 

Visits of Friends to the South, including Gill and Story . 63 

Chapter V. 

The Expansion of Southern Quakerism in the Eighteenth 
Centiky. 

Quaker growth in the seventeenth century, contrasted with 

that of the eighteenth 70 

1. The expansion of the native element : 

Materials for this history 71 

Visits of Kicliardson, Estaugh, Salkeld, and Chalkley 72 

Condition of Virginia meetings 74 

Condition of North Carolina meetings 77 

Visit of Fothergill ; Chalkley visits Charleston, 1713 . 78 
Visit of Wilson and Dickinson to Virginia and North 

Carolina 79 

VisitHof Holme, Fothergill and King, and Bownas • . 80 

Joshua Fielding's visit to South Carolina 82 

VisitH of Fothergill aud Woolman 83 

Native element reaches its greatest expantion in Vir- 
ginia ; decline begins 84 

The southward expansion in North Carolina 86 

Hihlory of Core Sound and Falling Creek Monthly 

Meetings 87 



Contents. xi 

History of Rich Square and Jack Swamp Monthly 

Meetings . . , 88 

Visits of Reckitt, Peisley and Peyton, S. Fothergill . 90 

History of Charleston Meeting 93 

Edisto ; other meetings ; summary 94 

2. The replanting of Southern Quakerism : 

The new Quaker movement southward ■ .* 96 

The Quaker and Scotch -Irish migrations contrasted . . 96 

Summary of this southward movement 96 

Settlement of Friends in Frederick and Fairfax coun- 
ties, Va 97 

History of the meetings in Campbell and Bedford coun- 
ties 100 

The wave of migration reaches North Carolina . . . 101 

Carver's Creek and Dunn's Creek Meetings 102 

History of Cane Creek Monthly Meeting 103 

History of New Garden Monthly Meeting 104 

Migration from Nantucket to New Garden 107 

Influence of New Garden Meeting 109 

Settlement of Nicholites in North Carolina 109 

Visits of Stanton, GriflBth, Judge Ill 

Growth of South Carolina meetings 113 

Planting of Quakerism in Georgia 117 

Visits of Job Scott and Joshua Evans 122 

Bush River Quarterly Meeting settled 124 

Summary for the eighteenth century 124 

Chapter VI. 
Quaker Social Life. 

Marriages ; second marriages ; fashions 126 

Feeling toward public office ; wealth ; their behavior in 

meeting 129 

Plainness; general high character of Friends 131 

Quakers an imperium in imperio 133 

Prominent Quakers : 

Henry White, Joseph Glaister 133 

William Matthews and the Jordan family 134 

Isaac Hammer, William and Nathan Hunt 136 

Jeremiah Hubbard and Nereus Mendenhali 138 

Quaker authors : 

The Quaker Index Expurgatorius 140 

Sophia Hume and Thomas Nicholson 140 

Barnaby Nixon and Thomas HoUowell 142 

Efforts at education 143 



xii Co )i tents. 

Chapter VII. 

Quakers and the Established Church. 

Position of Quakers on religious freedom 146 

Virginia order of 1692 145 

Report of County Court on Virginia Quakers, 1700 .... 147 

Virginia church acts ; sufferings in Virginia 148 

The Bill of Rights and Jefferson's bill 154 

Last phase of this question in Virginia 156 

The church struggle in South Carolina in 1704 157 

The North Carolina struggle, 1701-11 160 

The "Cary Rebellion " and the part of Quakers in the same 162 

Sufferings for tithes in North Carolina 167 

Fortunes of Quakers in South Carolina and Georgia . . . 168 

Sufferings under the marriage laws 168 

Sufferings under the oath 169 



Chapter VIII. 
Quakers and their Testimony against War. 

1. Before the Revolution : 

Position of Friends on war 171 

Early Virginia militia laws 171 

First militia persecution in North Carolina; later 

fortunes 171 

Later fortunes in Virginia ; in the French and Indian 

war 173 

Summary of recognition won by 1775 177 

Hermou Husband and the War of the Regulation in 

Nortli Carolina 178 

2. Quakers in the Revolution : 

Position of Friends toward the impending struggle . 183 

Tlie exiles in Virginia 185 

Visits of Brown and Douglass, of Thomas and Winston, 

to the South 187 

Fortunes of Virginia Quakers during the war .... 187 

Fortunes in the Caroliniis and Georgia 189 

Trouble with the oath of allegiance 191 

Their petition to the North Carolina Assembly .... 192 

Their treatment in the Caroliuas and Georgia .... 193 

3. Aft«'r tlie Revolution : 

SuljKuqueiit militia laws in North Carolina 194 

Subuuquent inililiu laws in South Carolina and Georgia 195 



Contents. xiii 

Subsequent militia laws in Virginia 196 

Sufferings in Virginia. 1807-1844 197 

Chapter IX. 

Southern Quakers and Slavery. 

Position of early Quakers on question of slavery .... 198 

Fothergill on slavery in Southern States 199 

Woolman on slavery in Virginia 200 

Divisions of the subject for Virginia 201 

Treatment of the subject by Virginia Yearly Meeting, 

1722-70 201 

Efforts to change Virginia emancipation law ; summary of 

these 205 

Rise of the slavery question in North Carolina Yearly 

Meeting, 1758-72 206 

Petition to Assembly, 1772 ; further progress, 1772-77 ... 207 

Struggle with the county courts, 1777 209 

Further development of the emancipation idea in Virginia, 

1773-82 210 

New emancipation law, 1782 ; its effects 212 

Virginia Abolition Society, 1790 213 

Robert Pleasants and his work 214 

Action of Virginia Yearly Meeting after 1800 215 

Effects of North Carolina law of 1779 on Quakers .... 217 
Work of North Carolina Yearly Meeting, 1779-86 .... 217 

Visits of Judge, Mifflin, Evans 218 

Petition of 1796 to North Carolina Assembly 220 

Presentment of Quakers by Grand Jury and petition of 

1797 223 

Work 1800-09 ; summary of laws and results of same . . 228 

The appointment of trustees 224 

Judge Gaston's opinion on this action 225 

Summary of the work of the trustees 226 

Efforts to educate the negroes ; . . 231 

Estimate of the work of the trustees 232 

Feeling toward negroes in the West and in Pennsylvania . 232 
The work of Manumission societies in North Carolina, 

1815-35 234 

Summary of work of North Carolina Quakers 241 

Anti-slavery sentiment in Virginia 243 

Difference between Virginia and North Carolina Quakers 

on slavery 243 

Disappearance of slavery as the central idea among South- 
ern Quakers ; reasons 244 



xiv Co)i tents. 

Chapter X. 

Southern Quakers and the Settlement of the Middle 
West. 

The organization of the Old Northwest 245 

Koutes to the western country ; methods of travel .... 246 

Migrations westward from the Virginia meetings .... 249 

Settlement of North Carolina Friends in Tennessee ... 251 

Work of Thomas Beales and t)ie westward impulse ■ ■ • 254 

Letter of Borden Stanton to Georgia 256 

Migrations from Contentnea Quarter 259 

Migrations from the Eastern Quarter 260 

Migrations from central North Carolina 262 

Migrations from South Carolina and Georgia 265 

Statistical tables summarizing the migrations 269 

Family names of the leading emigrants 272 

Autobiography of David Hoover 280 

Quotations from Addison Coffin 284 

The westward migration and the '' poor whites " 284 

Chapter XI. 
Thk Decline of Southern Quakerism. 

Decline in North Carolina and Virginia 286 

The Hicksite separation 287 

The laying down of Virginia Yearly Meeting 289 

Causes of the decline of Southern Quakerism 291 

The North Carolina Yearly Meeting since 1844 295 

Education in North Carolina Yearly Meeting 298 

North Carolina Friends in the Civil War 303 

Chapter XII. 
The Renaissance of North Carolina Yearly Meeting. 

Summary of meetings in 1869 308 

The work of Baltimore Association 309 

North Carolina Friends in 1875 316 

Conclusion 317 

Appendixes. i 

I. Statistics in 1890 322 

II. Time and jilace of Yearly Meetings, 1702-1895 324 

HI. List of meetings 328 

IV. Bibliography 345 



\ 



SOUTHERN QDAKERS AND SLAVERY. 



CHAPTER I. 
Introduction. 



The influence of the Quakers in the settlement and 
growth of the Southern States has never been sufficiently 
recognized. They appeared in Virginia soon after their 
organization; they were in the Carolinas almost with the 
first settlers; they were considerable in numbers and sub- 
stance; they were well behaved and law-abiding; they 
maintained friendly relations with the Indians; they were 
industrious and frugal; they were zealous missionaries, and 
through their earnest and faithful preaching became, to- 
ward the close of the seventeenth century, the largest and 
only organized body of Dissenters in these colonies. 

They have always been zealous supporters of religious 
freedom. They bore witness to their faith under bodily 
persecution in Virginia; under disfranchisement and tithes 
in the Carolinas and Georgia. By reason of their organiza- 
tion and numbers they were bold and aggressive in North 
Carolina in the struggle against the Established Church. 
They took the lead in this struggle for religious freedom 
in the first half of the eighteenth century, as the Presby- 
terians did in the latter half. They continued an important 
element in the life of these States until about 1800, when 
their protest against slavery took the form of migration. 
They left their old homes in the South by thousands, and 
removed to the free Northwest, particularly Ohio and In- 
diana. These emigrants composed the middle and lower 
ranks of society, who had few or no slaves and who could 
not come into economic competition with slavery. They 



2 Soutlirni QuaJccrs and »S7f/rcr^, 

were accompanied by many who were not Quakers, but who 
were driven to emigration by the same economic cause, and 
60 great was this emigration that in 1850 one-third of the 
population of Indiana is said to have been made up of 
native North Carolinians and their children. 

Soon after 1800 Quakers disappeared entirely from the 
political and religious life of South Carolina and Georgia. 
They now number only a few hundred in Virginia. They 
are now relatively less important in North Carolina than 
in colonial days, but are still an important factor in the 
making of that State. 

The times of the English Civil War and Commonwealth 
were rich in controversy. In no field was controversy more 
prominent and bitter than in that of religion. Discussion 
and disputes were frequent; they produced dissensions and 
divisions; they were carried on by exasperating methods; 
stern, harsh and vulgar language was used. The churches 
were put to all sorts of uses, and men frequently inter- 
rupted the minister to quarrel with him over theological 
points, while the care of souls was suspended. 

]51iiul mouths I that scarce themselves know how to hold 

A sheep hook, or have learned aught else the least 

That to the faithful herdman's art belongs ! 

What recks it them? What need they ? They are sped ; 

And when they list, their lean and flashy songs 

(Jrate on their scrannel pipes of wretched straw ; 

The hungry sheep look up and are not fed, 

But swoln with wind, and the rank mist they draw, 

Kct inwardly, and foul contagion spread. 

In the end Puritanism triumphed over the Episcopacy, 
and the Presbyterians over the Puritan; but, as Milton said, 
new presbyter was but old priest writ large, and the jang- 
ling sects continued to increase. Masson enumerates more 
than twenty. These sects were the logical outcome of the 
revolt against the State Church; for as soon as the right 
of the indivifhial to think for himself in religions matters 



Introduction. 3 

is recognized, as soon as heresy ceases to be capital, so 
soon does tlie judgment of the individual assert itself; a 
centrifugal force begins to act, and there is no theoret'cal 
limitation to the number of divisions possible. The prac- 
tical limitation is found in the gregariousness of the race. 
As Aristotle says, man is a social animal, -(iXtri/.o-^ C^oi/, 
and this instinct will always have a restraining influence 
on the multiplication of sects. 

The English sects of the seventeenth century were all 
advocates of religious liberty, and were filled with zeal 
against the Established Church. The Quakers also op- 
posed it strongly, but they were much more decent than 
many others. Fox usually waited until the minister was 
through before replying. His followers were not always 
so considerate. Their zeal manifested itself particularly in 
bearing testimony against a hireling ministry or barbarous 
laws, and they frequently ascribed these actions to a divine 
requirement; but, notwithstanding some blemishes of this 
character, I think it accurate to call Quakerism the flower 
of Puritanism, from which it was an outgrowth. 

The founder of the Society of Eriends was George Fox 
(1624-1691). He was born at Drayton in the Clay, in 
Leicestershire, England, in July, 1624. His father was a 
Puritan weaver, and the son, originally intended for the 
Church, was apprenticed to a shoemaker and dealer in 
wool. At a very early age Fox had " a gravity and stay- 
edness of mind and spirit not usual in children," and when 
he was eleven " knew pureness and righteousness." In 
1643 " I l^ft my relations, and broke off all familiarity or 
fellowship with young or old." For the next few years 
he was in spiritual darkness and groped after the light. He 
met with struggles and temptations, with bufTets and jeers, 
but the work of the Lord went forward, and many were 
turned from darkness to light by his labors. 

He dates the beginnings of his Society from Leicester- 
shire in 1644. The course of Quakerism was at first to- 
ward the north of England. It appeared iri Warwickshire 



4 Southern Quakers and Slavery. 

in 1645; i" Nottinghamshire in 1646; in Derby, 1647; ^^ 
the adjacent counties in 1648, 1649 and 1650. It reached 
Yorksliire in 1651; Lancaster and Westmoreland, 1652; 
Cumberland, Durham and Northumberland, 1653; London 
and most other parts of England, Scotland and Ireland in 
1654. In 1655 Friends went beyond sea "where truth also 
sprang up," and in 1656 " it broke forth in America and 
many other places." ' 

Fox was unremittent in his missionary labors, and trav- 
eled over England, Scotland, Wales and Ireland. He vis- 
ited the West Indies and North America. He went twice 
into Holland. His first imprisonment was at Nottingham 
in 1649. It was a strange thing then to be in prison for 
religion, and some thought him mad because he " stood 
for purity, righteousness and perfection," but the simplicity, 
the earnestness, the devotion, and the practical nature of 
this system when contrasted with the dry husk of Episco- 
pacy and the jangling creeds of the Dissenters soon won 
him adherents by the thousands. They came mostly from 
the lower ranks of society, but from all sects. 

Quakerism is distinctively the creed of the seventeenth ccn- 
tuPv'. Seekers were in revolt against the established order. 
It gave these seekers what they were seeking for. In 
theology it was un-Puritan; but in cultus, forms and modes 
it was more than Puritan. The Quaker was the Puritan 
of the Puritans. He was an extremist, and this brought 
him into conflict with the established order. He believed 
that Quakerism was primitive Christianity revived. He 
recognized no distinction between the clergy and laity; he 
refused to swear, for Christ had said, swear not at all; he 
refused to fight, for the religion of Christ is a religion of 
love, not of war; he would pay no tithes, for Christ had 
said, ye have freely received, freely give; he called no man 
master, for he thought the terms rabbi, your holiness and 
right reverend connoted the same idea. He rejected the 
dogmas of water baptism and the Puritan Sabbath, and in 



'Fox's Journal, II., 442. 



Introduction. 5 

addition to these claimed that inspiration is not Hmited to 
the writers of the Old and New Testaments, but is the gift 
of Jehovah to all men who will accept it, and to interpret 
the Scriptures men must be guided by the Spirit that guided 
its authors. Here was the cardinal doctrine of their creed 
and the point where they differed radically from other Dis- 
senters. Add to this the doctrine of the Inner Light, 
the heavenly guide given directly to inform or illuminate 
the individual conscience, and we have the corner-stones 
of their system. 

The Society of Friends was not organized by the establish- 
ment of meetings to inspect the affairs of the church until 
some years after Fox began preaching, and then a prominent 
part of the business of these meetings was to aid those 
Friends who were in prison, for persecution followed hard 
upon their increase in numbers. In i66i 500 were in prison 
in London alone; there were 4,000 in jail in all England; 
and the Act of Indulgence liberated 1,200 Quakers in 1673. 
But Quakerism flourished under persecution. They 
showed a firmness which has been seen nowhere else in 
the annals of religious history. Other Dissenters might 
temporize, plot against the Government or hold meetings 
in secret; the Quakers never. They scorned tliese thing*. 
They received the brutal violence of Government in meek- 
ness; they met openly and in defiance of its orders; they 
wearied it by their very persistence. 

In July, 1656, Ann Austin and Mary Fisher, the van- 
guard of a Quaker army, appeared in Boston from Bar- 
badoes. They were the first Quakers to arrive in America. 
They were imprisoned and shipped back. In October of the 
same year a law was passed which •provided a fine for 
the shipmaster who knowingly brought in Quakers, and 
obliged him to carry them out again. The Quaker was 
to be whipped and committed to the house of correction. 
Any person importing books " or writings concerning their 
devilish opinions," or defending their " heretical opinions " 
was to be fined, and for the third offense banished. Nor 



6 Southern Quakers and Slaver i/. 

was any person to revile the magistrates and ministry, " as 
is usual with the Quakers." The law of October, 1657, 
imposed a fine for entertaining a Quaker. If a Quaker 
returned after being sent away once he was to lose one 
ear; if he returned a second time, the other ear; and the 
third ofTense was punished by boring the tongue. The 
law of October, 1658, banished both resident and foreign 
Quakers under pain of death. In Massachusetts Quakers 
had their ears cut ofT; they w^ere branded; they were tied 
to the cart-tail and whipped through the streets ; women were 
shamefully exposed to public gaze; and in 1659-60 three men 
and one woman were hanged on Boston Common — such 
was the welcome of the first Quakers to American soil. This 
severity ceased to be a permanent factor in the policy of 
Massachusetts in 1677,. and in 1728 Quakers were exempted 
from tithes for support of the clergy. 

There is much discussion among students of New Eng- 
land history as to the amount of justification to be found 
for this treatment in the excesses of the Quakers themselves. 
Cotton ^Mather's Magnalia has been a storehouse of ammu- 
nition for apologists for Puritan bigotry. It was charged 
that Quakers worshipped the devil and said that the Bible 
was inspired by him; that they danced naked and denied 
civil authority. There w^ere cases of Quaker excesses, but 
these excesses were probably not the cause, but the result 
of Puritan harshness. And Hallowell pertinently remarks 
that had " suffrage been extended [in Massachusetts] to 
all citizens of character and good repute, instead of being 
limited to church members, it is probable there would have 
been an infusion of true religion and humanity into the 
laws, and the colony would have been spared the tragic 
record which now mirs its history." ' 

With this introduction of the Quaker into the New 
World we can turn to the Status of Dissent in the Southern 
colonies at the time of their appearance there. 

'Hallowell, Quaker Int'a^ion of MassnclDiscfta. C8. See also the 
apiiL-ndix to the second volume of Pickard's Life of JnJin G. ]Vhit- 
tirr. 



CHAPTER 11. 

The Status of Dissent in the South. 

In discussing the career of the Quakers in Virginia, the 
CaroHnas and Georgia, it is necessary for us to examine, first 
of all, the laws of these provinces concerning Dissent. This 
will show us at once the legal position of Friends. 

Virginia received three charters from the King in the sev- 
enteenth century. The last was issued in 1611-12. There 
is nothing in them of interest to us. The question of toler- 
ating Protestant Dissenters is not considered. It had not 
yet been recognized in England. These times were a sort 
of lull between two storms. England had passed through 
the storm of the Catholic reaction and was now firmly Prot- 
estant. The heyday of Puritanism had not yet come. The 
Church of England was the church of all the King's do- 
minions. The Jamestown colony did not prosper at first, 
and King James annulled the last charter "in 1624. From 
this time the colony was governed under laws made by the 
Virginia Assembly, with the approbation of the King or his 
representative, the Governor. Many of their early enactments 
relate to church affairs. They were careful to establish the 
church, so far as law could do it, and in 1642-43, to secure 
"the preservation of the puritie of doctrine & unitie of the 
church," it was enacted that no popish recusant should hold 
office, and any popish priest was to be sent out of the coun- 
try in five days. The Governor and Council were also to 
take care that all Nonconformist ministers should be silenced, 
and if they persisted in preaching, might be expelled the 
province.'' This law was aimed at the Puritans in Nanse- 

' Hening, Statutes at Large of Virginia, I., 268, 277. See Dr. H. R. 
Mcllwaine's The Struggle of Protestant Dissenters for Religious 
Toleration in Virginia, p. 10, for the full text of this l*w, quoted 
from Trott's Laws of the British Plantations. 



8 Soiithrnt (Jtcihrrs and ^larert/. 

niond County, and tlnis did Virginia orthodoxy establish the 
limit of religious thought beyond which none should dare 
to go. 

We sec the same spirit in the grant of Carolina to Sir 
Robert Heath in 1629. Here the King grants him " the 
patronages and advowsons of all churches which shall hap- 
pen to be built hereafter in the said region ... to have, ex- 
ercise, use and enjoy in like manner as any Bishop of Dur- 
ham within the Bishoprickc or county palatine of Durham." ' 

Nothing more is said in this charter on the question of 
religion or religious toleration. There is no sort of recogni- 
tion accorded to Dissenters. There was to be uniformity of 
religious opinions. The grant to Heath did not bring set- 
tlers, and in 1663 Charles H. granted the Province of Caro- 
lina to eight of his favorites. It was the clear purpose of 
Charles to establish the English Church, for the Proprietors 
had power " to build and found churches, chapels and ora- 
tories . . . and to cause them to be consecrated according 
to the ecclesiastical laws of our kingdom of England." ' 

But the influence of the religious element in the Civil War 
is clearly seen. That event laid the foundation for religious 
liberty. The State Church was not to be absolutely supreme 
in Carolina, as it was in Virginia. Section 18 provides for 
religious toleration " Because it may happen that some of 
the people and inhabitants of the said province cannot, in their 
private opinions, conform to the public exercise of religion. 
acccirding to the liturgy, form and ceremonies of the Chuich 
of England, or take and subscribe the oaths and articles, 
made and established in that behalf, and for that the same, 
by reason of the remote distances of these places, will, we 
hope be no breach of tlic unity and uniformity established 
in this nation, our will and our pleasure is and we do . . . 
give and grant unto the said Edward, Earl of Clarendon, 

etc full and free license, liberty and authority, . . . 

to give and grant unto such person or persons . . . who 

' ColtmuU liecurdH of N. C, I., 6, 7. • Ibid., I., 22. 



The Status of Dissent in the South. 9 

really in their judgments, and for conscience sake, cannot or 
shall not conform to the said liturgy and ceremonies, and 
take and subscribe the oaths and articles aforesaid, or any of 
them, such indulgences and dispensations in that behalf, for 
and during such time and times, and with such limitations 
and restrictions as they . . . shall in their discretion think 
fit and reasonable; and with this express proviso, and limita- 
tion also, that such person and persons . . . shall ... be 
subject and obedient to all other the laws, ordinances and 
constitutions of the said province, in all matters whatsoever 
as well ecclesiastical as civil." ^ 

The ideal aimed at by the Proprietors is then clear; but 
for a generation the Establishment was a harmless ideal. 
On the other hand, the authorities took care to impress 
would-be settlers that there was to be what they called the 
fullest religious freedom in Carolina. Thus we find Sir 
John Colleton writing to the Duke of Albemarle, under the 
date of June lo, 1663, that the persons designing to settle in 
North Carolina " expect liberty of conscience and without 
that will not go."' Again, on August 25, 1663, the Pro- 
prietors say in their proposals concerning settlements on the 
Cape Fear, that they " will grant, in as ample manner as the 
undertakers shall desire, freedom and liberty of conscience 
in all religious or spiritual things, and to be kept inviolably 
with them, we having power in our charter so to do." ^ Fur- 
thermore, the Proprietors, writing to Sir William Berkeley, 
September 8, 1663, in regard to the appointment of a Gov- 
ernor for Albemarle, assign as their reasons for giving him 
power to appoint two Governors instead of one in the terri- 
tory, that " some persons that are for liberty of conscience 
may desire a governor of their own proposing." * 

Again, the terms offered in 1665 to Sir John Yeamans 
and others who had made a settlement on the Cape Fear, 
bore on their face the evidence of remarkable liberality. It 
was provided that " no person . . . shall be any ways mo- 

' Col. Rec, I.. 32, 33. ' Ibid., I., 34. Ubicl, I., 45. •• Ibid, I., 54. 



10 Soiillicni Qtnilrrs and Slavery. 

lested, punished, disquieted or called in question for any 
differences in opinion or practice in matters of religious con- 
cernment." ' Later in the same year we find that Yeamans, 
then Governor of the Clarendon colony on Cape Fear, is 
instructed to do all he can to keep those in the " king's 
dominions that either cannot or will not submit to the gov- 
ernment of the Church of England." ' In 1667 the Proprie- 
tors direct Gov. Stephens to see to it that no persons shall 
be in " any w'ay molested, punished, disquieted or called in 
question for any differences in opinion or practice in matters 
of religious concernment who do not actually disturb the 
civil peace of the said province or county, but that all and 
even,' such person and persons may from time to time and at 
all times freely and fully have and enjoy their judgments and 
consciences in matter of religion." ° 

In the same way Locke made provisions in his Funda- 
mental Constitutions for the toleration of Dissenters, "that 
civil peace may be obtained amidst diversity of opinion." 
He provided that any seven persons agreeing in any religion 
should be constituted a " church or profession, to which 
they shall give some name, to distinguish it from others." * 
Three articles of belief were necessary to constitute any body 
of persons a church: (i) that there is a God; (2) that God is 
to be publicly worshipped; (3) that it is lawful and the duty 
of every man to bear witness to the truth when called on by 
the proper authority, and " that ever\' church or profession 
shall in their terms of communion set down the eternal way 
whereby they witness a truth as in the presence of God." ° 
No man was permitted to be a freeman in Carolina or to 
have any estate or habitation in it that did not acknowledge 
a God, and that he was to be publicly worshipped." No per- 
son above seventeen years of age could have any benefit or 
protection of law, nor hold any place of honor or profit who 
was not a member of some clnirch or profession.' No per- 
son of one faitli was to disturb or molest the religious as- 



' To/. AVr., I., so. HI. *Ibid., I.. 94. ^Ihid., I., 166. 

'Fiindariu'iital CoiistitntioiiH, sec. 97, in Col. Rec, I., pp. 187-207. 
'Ihi'l.. Hcc. 100. 'Ibid., ROC. 95. ' IbuL, sec. 101. 



i 



The (Status of Dissent in the South. 11 

semblies of others/ nor use reproachful, reviling or abusive 
language against any church or profession," nor persecute 
them for speculative opinions in religion or their ways of 
worship/ But in section 96 the doctrine was enunciated 
that as the country came to be " sufficiently planted and dis- 
tributed into fit divisions," it should be the duty of " parlia- 
ment to take care for the building of churches and the public 
maintenance of divines, to be employed in the exercise of 
religion according to the Church of England; which being 
the only true and orthodox, and the national religion of all 
the king's dominions, is so also of Carolina, and therefore it 
alone shall be allowed to receive public maintenance by 
grant of parliament." ^ 

The settlement of Georgia was not undertaken until 1732. 
Its object was primarily philanthropic, and the clauses of 
the charter of 1732 in regard to religion are more liberal 
than those of the Carolinas. No provision was made for 
an Established Church, although this idea does not seem to 
have been absent from the mind of the party drawing up the 
charter. Liberty of conscience was " allowed in the worship 
of God, to all persons inhabiting . . . and all such persons, 
except papists," were to have the " free exercise of religion, so 
they be contented with the quiet and peaceable enjoyment of 
the same, not giving ofifence nor scandal to the government." 
It was especially provided that Quakers be allowed to affirm." 
The Proprietary idea was a failure in Georgia also, and in 
1752 the colony passed into Royal hands. This left the 
Quakers without special provision save as they influenced 
legislation to that end. Further, the Episcopal Church had 
received official recognition in the province before any 
Quaker settlements were made there. 

We see, then, that the Quakers on coming into these 
provinces found themselves in different positions legally. 

' Fundamental Constitutions, sec. 102. 

* Ibid. , sec 106 . » Ibid. , sec. 109. 

* It is worthy of note that this section was not in the first set of 
Constitutions, dated July 21, 1669, and was inserted by Shaftesbury 
against the judgment of Locke. 

^Poore, Charters and Constitutions, 375. 



12 SoiitJn fH (^)i(iilrrs and Slavery. 

In Virginia tlieir status depended entirely on the will of the 
Governor and Assembly; they might have liberty and they 
might just as easily be deprived of all privileges. The 
policy pursued toward them might be steady or vacillating. 
There was no appeal from the law except to the King. 
When Georgia was settled their tenets were well known and 
religious freedom had made considerable progress. They 
were provided for and protected under the charter, but, as 
we have seen, they made no use of this privilege. 

In the Carolinas, on the other hand, the right of Dissenters 
to toleration was fixed in the charter and Fundamental Con- 
stitutions. But the amount of toleration, the time and way 
it was to be given, were matters left in the hands of the Pro- 
prietors entirely. The establishment of the English Church 
was the ultimate goal. It was not possible to introduce a 
state system at once, because many of the settlers were Dis- 
senters, and for the time it was held in abeyance. But that 
the Proprietors never intended to divorce Church and State 
is indicated by their frequent grants to assemblies " to con- 
stitute and appoint such and so many ministers or preachers 
as they shall think fit'"; by their grants to " each parish " of 
church sites and a hundred acres of land for the use of the 
minister.' and by the direct and elaborate provision in the 
Fundamental Constitutions of Locke. 

After giving notice of their ultimate purpose, the Proprie- 
tors could only wait for a time favorable to the execution of 
the ecclesiastical program. This did not come for a genera- 
tion. During the seventeenth century. North Carolina, and 
South Carolina up to 1698, were, in religious things, the 
freest of the free; but with the organization of the Society 
for the Promotion of Christian Knowledge and the Society 
for the Propagation of the Gospel, and the new missionary 
spirit infused into the Church by such men as Thomas 
Rray, it was thought that the time for the establishment of 
the Cluirch of England had come, and a religious struggle 
begins. 

' fol. Rec. , T. , 1 07. ' Tlnd. . I. . 81 , 92. 



CHAPTER III. 

The Planting of Quakerism in Virginia and the 
Carolinas. 

No Church since the days of the Apostles has allowed 
such great freedom in the Gospel to women as has been 
allowed by Friends. Under their system man and woman 
are equal, and Quaker women have repaid this greater 
liberty with an unsurpassed zeal and devotion. 

Massachusetts was the first American colony in which 
Quakerism was preached. The second seems to have been 
Virginia, although there is little difference in the time of its 
appearance in this colony and in Maryland. The person to 
plant the standard of Quakerism in the South was Elizabeth 
Harris, a native of London. Of her personal history we 
know little. She entered Virginia in 1656, and arrived in 
England on her return about July, 1657, " in a pretty condi- 
tion." Bowden says " her religious labors were blessed to 
many in that province, who were sincere seekers after 
heavenly riches, and she was instrumental in convincing 
many of the primitive and spiritual views of the Christian 
religion professed by Friends."' 

We know, however, very little of the number or character 
of these converts. It has been claimed that Robert Clark- 
son, a respectable and influential planter, was one of them. 
He is said to have lived at Severn, probably in what is now 
Gloucester County, but it is more probable that it was the 
Severn of the Puritan colony in Maryland." But Elizabeth 
Harris was not unmindfrri, after her return to England, of 
the needs of her proselytes in Virginia. She wrote them 
letters and sent them books, for one of the items in the 

^History nf Friends in America, I., 339. 
'See Mcllwaine. pp. 19. 20. 



14 Southern Qualrrs (uid SJavenj. 

national expense account of the Quakers for 1657 is ''for 
books to \^irginia, £2 5s." 

l'>iends soon met with opposition in Virginia. " The two 
messengers thou spoke of in thy letters," wrote Clarkson 
to Elizabeth Harris, "are not yet come to this place; we 
heard of two come to Virginia in the fore part of the winter, 
but we heard that they were soon put in prison and not suf- 
fered to pass; we heard further that they desired liberty to 
pass to this place, but it was denied them, whereupon one of 
them answered, that though they might not be suffered, yet 
he must come another time. We have heard that they are 
to be kept in prison until the ship that brought them be 
ready to depart the country again, and then to be sent out 
of the country." ^ 

These Friends were, most probably, Josiah Cole and 
Thomas Thurston." They visited Virginia toward the close 
of 1657 and continued to labor in the province until August, 
1658, when they traveled overland to New England.^ Thurs- 
ton soon after returned to Virginia and was again im- 
prisoned. 

There is evidence that persecution of Quakers followed 
these visits. Our information in this matter comes from 
the records of the General Court of Virginia. All the origi- 
nals of these records have been destroyed by fire except one 
volume. Extracts were made from the earlier volumes be- 



'Bowden,!., 341. 

*Cole (c. 1633-1668), whose name is also spelled Coale. was a 
native of Gloucester and was converted to Quakerism in Bristol in 
16.'34. lie twice visited America and the West Indies; he went to 
Hoi hind and the Low Countries. In England his labors extended 
to ahnost every county, and he suffered numerous imprisonments. 
In Maryland, alonj; with Richard Preston, he i)ushed Jacob Lum- 
broso, the Jew. to answer certain questions about his religious 
belief, whi(;h brought about his arrost for blasphemy. Cole was 
himself arrested under the proclamation of April 13, 1657, which 
reijuired an f)ath of fidelity to the Lord Proprietor. Thurston was 
also a (Jloucester man. He was imprisoned in Maryland soon after 
his departure from Virginia ; later he sided with Perrot in his 
schism. 

'Sewel, Ilistoiv/ nf the Quakers, ed. 1834, I., 351 ; Bowden, I., 342, 
343 ; Janney, llistorii of Friends, I., 433, 433. 



Quakerism in Yirginia and the CaroUnas. 15 

fore their destruction by Conway Robinson. These ex- 
tracts consist of headings or titles, extracts of proceedings, 
etc., and are now preserved in the Hbrary of the Virginia 
Historical Society. Under date of November 27, 1657, we 
find (pp. 353, 354) that Thomas Thurston and Josiah Cole, 
Quakers, were sentenced to depart the colony on a sloop, 
and in the meantime were to be committed to custody; they 
were not to have the use of pen, ink or paper, and were not 
to correspond with the citizens. At the same time it was 
ordered that masters of sloops who brought in Quakers 
should be fined and compelled to take them out again (p. 
354). The inference is that Cole and Thurston were kept 
in prison all that winter, for we hear no more of them until 
March, 1657(58), when they were allowed to go to Maryland 
(p. 382). This is probably the release referred to by one of 
the contemporar}^ Quaker authorities, who says: "The gov- 
ernor of that place [probably S. Matthews] hath promised 
that he shall have his liberty in the country; where there is 
like to be a great gathering, and the living power of the 
Lord goes along with him." ^ 

But this was not the end of persecution. We find that 
one Quaker was whipped (p. 413); that one was fined for 
entertaining another Quaker (pp. 413, 416); that other 
Quakers were punished in ways not stated; and that on June 
10, 1658, a general persecution of Quakers was directed (p. 
416). 

The results of these severities were the opposite of what 
was expected. Quakerism grew by the buffets it received. 
About this time Virginia was visited by William Robinson, 
Robert Hodgson and Christopher Holder, all of Avhom had 
come over in Robert Fowler's vessel, the Woodhoiise. 
Concerning this visit Robinson writes Fox from Boston jail: 
" There are many people convinced, and some there are 
brought into the sense and feeling of truth in several places." ' 

'Bowden, I.. 343. 

"Bowden, I., 846 ; Janney. I.. 433, 434. Robinson was hanged in 
Boston the next year. Hodgson was probably a native of Skipton 



16 ^oiifltcrn QitaJccr.s and I^Jarcn/. 

Thus did these hunihle missionaries of the Cross plant their 
standard in X'irginia in the midst of diftieidty and danger. 
\'irginia was not a land in which religious freedom thrived. 
Loyalty was its corner-stone, and its narrowness and devo- 
tion to the cause of the Established Church had been in- 
creased by the crowds of Cavaliers who had come over to 
escape from the tender mercies, political and religious, of the 
Puritan Establishment. Dissenters had few privileges in 
Virginia. A law enacted in 1643 had given the Governor 
and Council power to " suspend and silence " any minister 
who undertook to teach or preach without the ordination of 
the Church of England, and if he still persisted he might be 
expelled from the province.' It was under this law that 
Quakers were first punished. Four months' imprisonment 
and whippings was certainly the full extent of the law to 
" suspend and silence." We are to remember also that this 
was not the work of Sir William Berkeley. It agrees so well 
with his character that we are apt to credit him with it, but 
it was the work of the Commonwealth men, who, it might 
be supposed, were enough in sympathy to give the Quakers 
passive sufferance at least. 

It was not until March, 1659(60), that there were enact- 
ments against Quakers co nomine. This act was the first 
passed against the Society in the colonies we are studying. 
and one of the earliest in America. It fittingly marks the 
return of Berkeley to power. The prefatory remarks to this 
act are worthy of notice, as they give us the popular im- 
pression of the object, aims and results of Quakerism; and 
this misunderstanding, so far as it is sincere, is the best 
and the only excuse for the infamous treatment which 
Quakers in many places received. 

The introduction to the act goes on to recite that " where- 
in Yorksliire. lie first a])|)e;ired iuiionp Friends in Berksliire in 
If).")."), lie snfTored persecution in tlie Old World and the New. 
Holder (c. 1028-1688) was of Gloucestershire, was now on his second 
visit to Atnorica, and had suflFered imprisonment at Ilchester as 
early as 105.'). 

'See a///e, j). 7. 



Quakerism in Virginia and the Garolinas. 17 

as there is an unreasonable and turbulent sort of people, 
commonly called Quakers, who, contrary to the law, do daily 
gather together unto them unlawful assemblies and congre- 
gations of people, teaching and publishing lies, miracles, 
false visions, prophecies and doctrines, which have influence 
upon the communities of men both ecclesiastical and civil, 
endeavoring and attempting thereby to destroy religion, 
laws, communities and all bonds of civil society, leaving it 
arbitrary to every vain and vicious person whether men shall 
be safe, laws established, ofifenders punished, and gover- 
nors rule, hereby disturbing the public peace and just inter- 
est, to prevent and restrain which mischief," etc., it was 
enacted: That every shipmaster bringing a Quaker into Vir- 
ginia was to be fined iioo; that all Quakers who have been 
questioned or shall hereafter arrive shall be arrested and im- 
prisoned "without bail or mainprize till they do abjure uiis 
country or put in security with all speed to depart the colony 
and not to return again." If any returned after being thus 
deported they were to be proceeded against as " contemners 
of the laws and magistracy," and to be punished accordingly. 
If they came to Virginia the third time they were to be 
treated as felons. No person could entertain a Quaker, nor 
a person suspected of Quakerism by the Governor and his 
Council, nor allow a Quaker assembly in or near his house, 
on penalty of iioo sterling. Commissioners and officers 
were warned at their peril to see that the act went into effect. 
All persons were warned that they published books or pam- 
phlets containing Quaker tenets and opinions at their peril.^ 
Again, in March, 1662, under the caption " Sundays not 
to be profaned," the Protestant legislators of Virginia could 
find nothing better than to rake up the statute of 23d Eliza- 
beth, which was aimed at Romish recusants, and apply it to 
the Quakers. This law imposed a penalty of £20 a month 
for refusing to go to church, " and if they forbear a twelve- 

' Hening, I., 532. This law bears striking resemblance to the 
Massachusetts law of 1658, and was probably a copy. 



18 Southern Quaker's and Slavery. 

month then to give good security for their good behavior 
besides their payment for their monthly absences, according 
to the tenor of the said statute. And that all Quakers for 
assembling in unlawful assemblies and conventicles be fined 
and pay each of them there taken, 200 pounds of tobacco 
for each time they shall be for such unlawful meeting taken 
or presented by the church-wardens to the county court," 
and in case any members were insolvent, the more able were 
to pay for them/ 

A further act empowers the church-wardens to present to 
the court twice a year all cases of offense under this law/ 
And in December, 1662, it is enacted that, " Whereas many 
schismatical persons, out of their averseness to the orthodox 
established religion, or out of the new-fangled conceits' of 
their own heretical inventions, refuse to have their children 
baptized," such persons should be fined 200 pounds of 
tobacco. It is evident that this law was aimed at both 
Baptists and Quakers. It is probable that the latter were 
more numerous and suffered most under its provisions.' 

It is to be noted that the law of 1659-60 was not inserted 
in the revisal of the laws of the colony made in 1662. We 
are probably justified in assuming that it failed to accom- 
plish the end aimed at in its enactment. Its place was sup- 
plied by tlie law of September. 1663. to prohibit " the un- 
lawful assembling of Quakers," * and which is considerably 
more humane than the law of 1659-60. This act recites that the 
Quakers were endangering the public peace, and gave color- 
ing " to the terror of the people by maintaining a secret and 
strict correspondence among themselves." The law then pro- 
vided that if " Quakers, or any other separatists whatsoever in 
this colony," should at any time assemble to the number of five 
or more of the age of sixteen, " at any time in any one place 
under pretence of joining in religious worship not authorized 
by the laws of England nor this country," the party offend- 
ing was to be fined for first offense 200 pounds of tobacco, 

' llr-ninp. II.. 48. "IbkL, II.. 51. 

Ibid., XL, 165. ■'Ibid., II., 180-183. 



Quakerism in Virginia and the Carolinas. 19 

for the second offense they were to be fined 500 pounds of 
tobacco, to be levied by distress and sale of goods. If there 
were some unable to pay this fine the sum was to be collected 
" from the rest of the Quakers or other separatists then 
present." For the third offense the party was to be ban- 
ished. All shipmasters bringing in Quakers to reside, ex- 
cept in accordance with the English act of May 19, 1663, 
were to be fined 5,000 pounds of tobacco, and had to take 
them out again on the return voyage. Persons entertaining 
Quakers to preach or teach were to be fined 5,000 pounds 
of tobacco. Officers neglecting to enforce this act or con- 
niving at neglect of it were to be fined 2,000 pounds of 
tobacco. But if Quakers or others, after being convicted, 
should give security not to violate the act again, they were to 
be discharged from further penalties.^ 

The horrible character of this Virginia Conventicle Act 
comes out only on close examination. By its terms all Dis- 
senters were alike forbidden to worship; not even could a 
minister or a layman offer a prayer at the bedside of the 
dying if there were five grown persons present. Men were 
forbidden to exercise hospitality, and as Dissent was looked 
on as a social evil, the whole body of Dissenters was held 
responsible for the acts of a part. What we might call the 
social solidarity of Dissent was emphasized, and fhere was no 
way of escape from responsibility save in flight to the Es- 
tablishment. 

Nor were these laws idle threats. Friends had experi- 
enced hardships and imprisonments in Virginia under the 
Commonwealth. The Restoration in England and the re- 
turn of the royalists to power in Virginia was the sign tor 

' The Parliamentary act of May 19, 1663, is clearly the original of 
the Virginia statute. It provided against the assembling of Qua- 
kers to the number of five or more over sixteen years of age for 
religious worship, and punished them for refusing to take an oath. 
For the third offense they were to be transported " in any Ship or 
Ships to any of His Majesties Plantations beyond the Seas." The 
Virginia law does not contain the provision against refusing to 
swear, but was in other respects considerably harsher than its 
English prototype. 



20 Sou f hem Quakers (uid Slavery. 

the beginning of more persecution. One of the first acts 
of the restored royalists was to disfranchise Maj. John Bond 
for " factious and schismatical demeanors." ^ We do not 
know that Bond's ofifense was Quakerism, but it was in all 
probabihty of a rehgious character, and" comports with the 
character of Sir William Berkeley, who was now in power. 
About 1661 George Wilson, a native of Cumberland, visited 
Virginia. He had been imprisoned in Cumberland for " re- 
proving a priest." He had been cast into jail in Boston, and 
was whipped through three towns and banished. From 
Puritan New England he turned to Cavalier Virginia. Here 
he was cast into a dungeon, very loathsome, without light, 
without ventilation. " Here, after being cruelly scourged 
and heavily ironed, for a long period, George Wilson had to 
feel the heartlessness of a persecuting and dominant hier- 
archy; until at last his flesh actually rotted from his bones, 
and within the cold damp walls of the miserable dungeon of 
James's Town he lay [sic] down his life a faithful martyr for 
the testimony of Jesus." William Coale, of ISIaryland, was a 
fellow-prisoner with Wilson in the jail at Jamestown, and 
never fully recovered' from the effects of the imprisonment 
which he then endured." 

But notwithstanding these persecutions, Coale was able to 
report that his visit to Mrginia was a successful one. " Some 
were turned to the Lord through his ministry, and many 
were established in the truth." Josiah Cole was also in Vir- 
ginia during his second visit to America in 1660. He writes 
to Fox: "I left Friends in Virginia generally very well and 
fresh in the truth." He was then in Barbadoes and had 
drawings to return to Virginia.' George Rolfe (d. 1663), a 
resident of Holstead in Essex, who had suffered various im- 

'Hening, II., 39. 

'Bowden, I , 344-346, quoting Bishop's New England Judged, and 
Piet)/ Promoted, Kendall's ed.. I., 97-98. Coale died c. 1G78. We 
are tempted to regard some of these accounts as exaggerated, be- 
cause there is no provision for imprisonment in the law, but it fol- 
lowed naturally and necessarily on the refusal to pay fines. 

'Bowden, I., 346. 



Quakerism in Vir^ginia and the (Jarolinas. 21 

prisonments for his faith, also visited Virginia in 1661. We 
have no definite account of his work, but he writes to Stephen 
Crisp, " The truth prevaileth through the most of all these 
parts [Barbadoes], and many settled meetings there are in 
Maryland, and Virginia and New England." ' 

In the same year Elizabeth Hooton and Joan Brocksoppe 
visited Virginia from England. This seems to have been 
the first voyage made direct. Elizabeth Hooton {c. 1 600-1 671) 
was the wife of Samuel Hooton, of Skegby, in Nottingham- 
shire, and was associated with Fox as early as 1647. She 
was the first woman, and the first person after Fox, to enter 
the ministry of Friends. She was imprisoned as early as 
1 65 1. This was her first visit to America; she made a 
second voyage soon after, and died in Jamaica while under- 
taking a third voyage with Fox and Edmundson in 1671.'' 
Of Joan Brocksoppe we know but little save that she was the 
wife of Thomas Brocksoppe, of Little Normanton, and died 
in 1680. We have no particulars of their visit to Virginia. 
They then went to Boston, were banished thence, returned 
to Virginia, and Elizabeth Hooton suffered because of her 
testimony." 

The next traveling Friends in Virginia were Joseph Nich- 
olson, John Liddal and Jane Millard. Of the last we know 
nothing. Liddal, it is believed, was of Cumberland. They 
all labored in New England and suffered there. Nicholson 
was for one night a prisoner in New Amsterdam, and after 
his return to England was imprisoned in Dover Castle. 
Their visit to Virginia was about March, 1662. " They had 
many hard travels and sufferings in the service of the Lord." * 

Mary Tompkins and Alice Ambrose were the next visi- 
tors {c. 1662). They had been associated in the work of the 
ministry before coming to America. In Virginia " we have 
had good service for the Lord . . . our sufferings have been 

' Bowden. I. , 347. This letter shows that there were settled meet- 
ings in Virginia certainly as early as 1661. They were probably 
earlier still. 

"^Ihid., I., 260. 'Sewel, I., 435 ; Bowden, I., 847. 

< Bowden, I., 265, 268, 348, quoting Bishop, 428. 



22 Soutfivru QuaJco's and Slavery. 

large amongst them. . . . We are now about to sail for Vir- 
ginia again." ' They returned to Virginia, and Sewel tells 
us what these " sufferings " were. They had been pilloried, 
and each had been whipped " with thirty-two stripes, with a 
whip of nine cords, and every cord with three knots; and 
they were handled so severely that the very first lash drew 
blood and made it run down from their breasts." Tliey 
had recently experienced the same sort of treatment in Mas- 
sachusetts, their goods were then seized, and they were ex- 
pelled from the colony in June, 1664.' 

It has been suggested that some of these persecutions 
were the work of mobs and that the people in their organic 
capacity are not to be held responsible for them. It is to be 
hoped that this is true; but even in that case the Government 
set the example in brutality, as we have seen. We have note 
of proceedings by the General Court at James City, April 
4, 1662, in the Robinson Manuscripts, but the record itself 
has been lost. 

In the case of Norfolk County our evidence is full and 
also unimpeachable, as it comes from the county records. 
In December, 1662, Col. John Sidney, high sheriff of Nor- 
folk County, had caused a number of persons, among whom 
was his own daughter, to be summoned to court for holding 
a Quaker meeting, and tlicy were fined 200 pounds of 
tobacco each. This is the first case of persecution of resi- 
dent Quakers that we have met with. These fines were im- 
posed under the law of March, 1662. John Hill became the 
high sheriff of Norfolk County in April, 1663. He was 
either tempted by the bait of one-half of the fines which the 
law allowed to the informer, or by religious zeal, or both, 
and began a systematic persecution of the Quakers. The 
fines against them for this year in Norfolk County alone 
amounted to £100 sterling and 20,750 pounds of tobacco. 

' Janney, II., 97; Bowden. I., 348. 849. 

'Scwj'l. (luotinR Bishop. I.. 43*; ; Howflcn, I.. 25^, 849. Of the 
viKJt of (Icorge Preston and Wonlock Clnistisou iu 16G3 we have no 
jtarticuhirH. 



Quakerism in Virginia and the Carolinas. 23 

It was a profitable year to Hill. He is the man who re- 
ported to the House of Burgesses that John Porter, the rep- 
resentative in that body from Lower Norfolk County, was 
" loving to the Quakers and stood well afifected towards 
them, and had been at their meetings, and was so far an Ana- 
baptist as to be against the baptizing of children." On Sep- 
tember 12, 1663, the trial took place. Porter confessed that 
he was loving to Friends, but denied that his accusers could 
establish the truth of their accusations. But the Assembly 
had a shibboleth of orthodoxy with which they tried him. 
They administered to him the Oath of Supremacy. He re- 
fused to swear and was expelled from the House.^ 

Again, on the 12th of November, 1663, Hill found another 
Quaker meeting at the residence of Richard Russell, and 
summoned some 35 persons, including John Porter, Sr., 
and John Porter, Jr., to court. Ten days later Hill discov- 
ered a Quaker meeting on the ship Blissing, at anchor in the 
southern branch of Elizabeth river, and summoned John 
Porter, Jr., who was speaking; James Gilbert, master of the 
ship; Mrs. Mary Emperor, and others, to court. December 
15 they were fined 200 pounds of tobacco each, this being 

'Hening, II., 198. There has existed much confusion in North 
Carolina in regard to the career of this John Porter. Hon. George 
Davis, in his paper, A Study in Colonial History, pp. 16-17, says 
that Porter soon moved to Albemarle [N. C], settled probably in 
Perquimans County, and became the father of that John Porter 
who was the leader of the ''Cary Rebellion " in 1705. This is in- 
correct. Mr. John W. H. Porter, of Portsmouth, Va.. has recently 
extracted his history from the records of Norfolk County. John 
Porter, Sr., is first mentioned in the county records, Dec. 16, 1647, 
when an order was entered allowing him 100 pounds of tobacco for 
killing a wolf, and on the 16th of March, 1648. a similar order was 
entered. Jan. 17, 1652, he was granted a certificate for 200 acres 
of land for having brought four persons into the colony. March 
29, 1655, he was appointed a justice of the county court ; August 15, 
1653, was married to Miss Mary Savill. Jan. 13, 1661. was granted 
300 acres of land under patent from the Governor; Sept. 12, 1663, 
was expelled from the House of Burgesses ; Nov. 17. 1663, was 
fined 200 pounds of tobacco for attending a Quaker meeting, 50 
pounds of tobacco for not attending public worship, and 350 pounds 
of tobacco for setting outtobacco plants on Sunday, and must there- 
fore have been a planter. Aug. 16.1671. was appointed road sur- 
veyor for the Eastern Branch section of Norfolk County. April 17, 



24 i'^aiithcni Quakers and Slavery. 

their first trial. On the same day others were fined 50 
pounds each for absenting themselves from public worship, 
and the grand jury presented John Porter, Jr., and Mrs. 
Mary Emperor and others for attending a meeting on that 
day at the house of ]\Irs. Emperor. The trial for the offense 
of November 12 occurred on February 14 following. John 
Porter, Jr.. and Mrs. Mary Emperor were fined 500 pounds 
of tobacco each, for it was their second offense; Richard 
Russell was fined 5,000 pounds of tobacco for permitting the 
meeting to be held at his house, and the others were fined 
200 pounds of tobacco each, as it was their first offense. The 
trial for the meeting held at the house of Mrs. Emperor on 
December 15 also came off then. Mrs. Emperor and John 
Porter, Jr., were ordered to be sent out of the colony, it 
being their third correction. Ann Godby was fined 500 
pounds of tobacco, it being her second correction, and 
others were fined 200 pounds, as it was their first. The 
sentence of transportation passed against Porter and Mrs. 
Emperor was not carried out. They were persons of influ- 
ence in the county, and as there was no profit to the in- 

1672, was appointed one of the Justices of the Quorum of the 
county and served until his deatli. Aug. 17, 1675, was the last daj' 
he presided at court. Feb. 15. 1675(76). his will was recorded ; it 
was entirely in his own handwriting. He left nearly all his pro]>erty 
to his widow and her heirs forever, and appointed her executrix ; 
he gave his best suit of clothes to '' my brother, John Porter, Jr." 
He gave also certain cattle to be divided among the children of this 
John Porter, Jr.. upon their arriving at the age of twenty-one years, 
but his will makes no mention of any children of his own. His 
widow married George Lawson in April, 1676; he died that fall; 
in the spring of 1677 she married Thomas Fenwick and died in 1678. 
She gave her property to Fenwick for his life, and at his death it 
was to go to John Porter, Jr. This is another reason for thinking 
she had no children of her own. On the contrary, the will of Rich- 
ard Russell, who died Jan. 24. 1667. appoints John Porter, Sr.. his 
executor and leaves a lot of books to the oldest son of the said John 
Porter, Sr. ; if he had a son at that date he must have died before 
his father. At the time of his death Porter was a commissioner of 
the AsKociation of Nanseinoiid River Fort, a jiosition which would 
be inconsistent with the character of a Quaker (see Heniiig. II., 
255-8). It is i)robable that he sympathized with but was not actu- 
ally a member of the Society. See also IMr. Porter's article on 
"Norfolk fjiiakers," in Richmond DisjMitch, Dec. 3. 1893. 



Quakerism in Virginia and the Carolinas. 25 

former in their transportation the sentence was probably- 
allowed to die of itself. Hill's term as sheriff expired in 
1664, and there was no further persecution of Quakers in 
this county until 1675/ 

It will be noticed that the penalty of fifty pounds of to- 
bacco, inflicted for not attending church, was much lighter 
than the legal penalty, while the other fines were in strict 
conformity with the law of September, 1663. It is more than 
probable that the industrious Hill had something to do with 
securing its passage. It is evident that its enforcement was 
spasmodical, depending almost entirely on the personal 
equation of the officers. 

Material comes to us to illustrate this narrow bigotry of 
our fathers, from records of the Friends as well as from pub- 
lic records. No other sect has been s(j careful, so anxious 
to preserve the record of their sufferings as have Friends. 
When Fox was in Virginia in 1672 he laid down rules and 
regulations for the guidance of the Society. Besides mak- 
ing inquiry concerning the payment of tithes and supporting 
the families of those in prison for sake of their testimony, 
they were to see to it " that all the Sufferings of friends of all 

_ 

■ See article in Richmond Dispatch. Dec. 3, 1893, by John W. H. 
Porter. I am again indebted to Mr. Porter for the history of John 
Porter. Jr., who was the brother of John Porter, Sr. , as we liave 
already seen from the will of the latter. John Porter. Jr.. first 
appears in the records on the 21st of Dec, 1651. when an order was 
entered recording tlie marks on his cattle. He was appointed a 
justice of the county court, March 29. 1655, at the same time as 
John Porter. Sr. He was made high sheriff. April 21, 1656. His 
wife was the daughter of Col. John Sidney. He was undoubtedly 
a Quaker, for he was on several occasions addressing the meetings 
when arrested. After his third conviction and sentence to trans- 
portation he ceased to hold any public office, but remained in the 
colony, and quite a number of deeds are recorded from different 
parties giving him power of attorney to attend to their affairs, suits. 
bills, etc., during their absence. At the time of the formation of 
Princess Anne County, in April, 1691 (Hening. Ill , 95), John Por- 
ter, Jr., now called John Porter, owned land on the Princess Anne 
side of the line, became a citizen of the new county and resided in 
Lynn Haven Parish. His will is said to be on record in Princess 
Anne County. It seems strange that there should have been two 
brothers of the same name, but such was the case. Besides thd 
evidence already found in the will of John Porter, Sr., we have an 



26 Soiifhrni Qualrrs; and Slavery. 

kinde of sufferings in all the Countrys be gathered up & put 
together & Sent to the gennerall meeting, & So Sent to Lon- 
don to Elise Hookes, that nothing of the memoriall of the 
blood & cruell Sufferings of the bretheren be Lost, which 
shall stand as a testimony against the Murdering Spiritt of 
this world, & be to the praise of the everlasting power of the 
Lord in the ages to come, who supported & upheld them in 
Such hardsliips & cruelties, who is god over all blessed for 
ever Amen." 

The first case of persecution which we have from this 
source is that of William Parratt and Edward Jones, about 
1663. They were arrested for having a meeting at Parratt's 
house, and were kept for some time prisoners in the house 
of the sheriff of Isle of Wight County. Another case was 
that of Thomas Jordan, of Chuckatuck, in Nansemond 
County. He was born in 1634, received the truth in 1660, 
and died on the 8th of 9th month, 1699. ^^^ sufferings 
date from September, 1664. He was imprisoned six months 
for being taken in a meeting at his own hovtse. He was re- 
leased by the King's proclamation. He was taken a second 
time at a meeting at Robert Lawrence's, and bound over to 

additional one in the sale on Aug. 28, 1691, by John Porter, the first 
Jr., and second Sr., of a tract of land taken up under patent by 
Col. John Sidney and sold by him to John Porter, Sr. (1st), and 
John Porter, Jr. (1st), Jan. 4, 1648, and also a tract of 3o0 acres 
" wiiich was taken up by vuj brother^ John Porter, Sr., on the 16th 
of March, 1663." 

John Porter. Jr.. the first, who later became the second Sr., had 
a son who was known as John Porter, Jr.. the second. This sou 
was not of ape in ]67o, as we have learned from tlie will of his 
uncle, the first John Porter, Sr. He does not appear in the court 
records until May 20. 1679, when his father gave him a power of 
attorney. We may therefore assume that he had at this time at- 
tained his majority. He was both a planter and a merchant, and 
on Jan. 16. 1688. bought 400a(n-esof land near the Currituck County 
line. This brought him toward North Carolina. When Norfolk 
County was divided in 16111 lie remained in the old county, while 
his father's resideiu-e fell within the new. On Oct. 11. 1690, he 
(rave a df'ed to one Kemp, which mentions him as "of Norfolk 
County. Elizabeth River Parish." Sei)t. 15, 1693. he obtained a 
judgment to a suit in the Norfolk County court, but was then a res- 
ident of Albemarle County. North Carolina, and his name does not 
appear again in the Norfolk (M)unty records. The proof that he 



Quakerism in Virginia and the Carolinas. 27 

court; he refused to swear, was sent up to Jamestown, and 
was a prisoner ten months. The sheriff took away three 
servants and kept them nine weeks; he took by distress beds 
and other goods amounting to 3,907 pounds of tobacco; he 
took also a serving-man and ten head of cattle, valued at 
5,507 pounds of tobacco. 

Nor were the Virginia Quakers during these years free 
from internal discord. Tompkins and Ambrose write in 
1663, "John Perrot is now amongst them; many there are 
leavened with his unclean spirit. He has done much hurt, 
which has made our travels hard and our labors sore; for 
which we know he will have his reward, if he repent not." 

Perrot was the leader of the first schism among Friends. 
He was a man of great natural parts, and united with Friends 
at an early period. In 1660 he traveled in the ministry to 
Rome to convert the Pope. He manifested much spiritual 
pride, and the Inquisitors thinking him of unsound mind, 
committed him to Bedlam. His schism began in 1661. 
The three points in which he differed from Fox seem to 
have been: (i) he maintained that the practice of uncovering 
the head in time of prayer was a mere form and one that 

was then a resident of Albemarle County comes from the Princess 
Anne records : May 3, 1693, " John Porter, Jr., of the county of 
Albemarle, in North Carolina," gave a power of attorney to his 
"brother" Thomas Solley, of Elizabeth River in the county of 
Norfolk in Virginia. We know that Solley had married Porter's 
sister. This John Porter, then, nephew of the man of that name 
expelled from the Virginia House of Burgesses for Quakerism, re- 
moved to North Carolina between Oct. 11, 1690, and May 3, 1693. 
and is, beyond doubt, the same as the man of that name who was 
Speaker of the North Carolina House of Bvirgesses in 1697 and was 
so prominentia the ''Cary Rebellion." If we assume that he be- 
came of age in 1679, he was still in the prime of life in 1705. He 
remained a prominent citizen of the colony and died in 1713. His 
will is on file in Raleigh. As it bears date Jan. 8. 1713, and was pro- 
bated Aug. 7 of the same year, it seems that Porter died in the 
spring or summer of 1713. In his will are mentioned Marj% his 
wife -, sons, John, Edmund, Joshua, Matthew ; daughters. Sarah, 
Eliza, and son-in-law. John Lillington, husband of Sarah. He had 
retained some of his landed interests in Princess Anne County. It 
will also be seen further on. when we come to treat of the struggle 
between Quakerism and the Established Church in North Carolina. 
1705-11, that an Edmund Porter w-as prominent on the side of the 
Dissenters. He is no doubt the son of the subject of this sketch. 



28 Sunt hern Quakert; a)ul ^^lavery. 

ought to be testified against; (2) the second " extravagancy" 
was that he let his beard grow; (3) he discouraged attendance 
on meetings for worship, on the ground that this also was a 
mere form. These are the charges brought against him by 
the Quaker historian Bowden (I., 349-353). However in- 
different a matter the first charge may have been, and how- 
ever trifling the second, it is certain that he gained many to 
his way of thinking in Virginia because of his appearance 
of superior sanctity and austereness. His influence on the 
development of the Society was particularly bad in Vir- 
ginia because of his third tenet, for he preached against 
meetings on set days when their persecutors would know of 
it and might sweep down upon them. In this way their 
peculiar testimonies were likely to be lost sight of entirely. 
Thomas Jordan, who had himself gone off in the Perrot 
schism, returned in 1678, and said that this effort to shirk 
persecution had done the Society more harm than the perse- 
cution itself. Many of those who had been thus led astray 
returned in later years, but the immediate effect was to 
cause the Society to lose vitality and languish 

When John Burnyeat (1631-1690) visited Virginia in 1665 
he complained that " they had quite forsaken their meetings 
and did not meet together once in a year, and many of them 
had lost the very form and language of the truth," and had, 
in a great measure, relinquished their testimonies in order to 
shun the truth. Burnyeat spent some months in Virginia 
and Maryland, and it was with dif^culty that he obtained a 
meeting among them. But " the Lord's power was with us 
and amongst us, and several were revived and refreshed, 
and through the Lord's goodness and his renewed visita- 
tions, raised up into a service of life, and in time came to see 
over the wiles of the enemy." ' 

The effects of the work of Burnyeat were very manifest 
when he came on his second visit to America in 1671 : "I 
went down to Virginia [in November, 1671] to visit Friends 

'Journal, iu Friends'' Librai-i/, XL, 136. 



Quakerism in YirgUiia and the Carolinas. 29 

there, and found a freshness amongst them; and many of 
them were restored, and grown up to a degree of their for- 
mer zeal and tenderness; and I found a great openness in 
the country, and had several blessed meetings. I advised 
them to have a men's meeting, and so to meet together to 
settle things in good order amongst them, that they might 
be instrumental to the gathering of such as were yet scat- 
tered, and stirring up of such as were cold and careless; and 
so keep things in order, sweet, and well Amongst them." * 

We have at this point some vivid and biting characteriza- 
tions of the Quakers, which may be fairly taken as a sample 
of the way they were regarded by many of their contem- 
poraries. There was a settlement of Quakers on the border 
line between Accomac County, Virginia, and Somerset 
County, Maryland. Edmund Scarborough, who was sur- 
veyor-general of Virginia, was sent to collect taxes on the 
Eastern Shore, and sought to bring these settlers under the 
rule of Virginia. They refused to recognize her authority 
and claimed to be under Maryland. This angered the Vir- 
ginia officer and gave him an opportunity to characterize 
them after his own fashion. One was " repugnant to all 
government, of all sects, yet professed by none, constant in 
nothing, but opposing church government, his children at 
great ages yet unchristened." Another was the " proteus 
of heresy . . . notorious for shifting scismatical pranks." A 
third was a "creeping Quaker." A fourth "was often in 
question for his quaking profession, ... a receiver of many 
Quakers, his house the place of their resort."' 

For the next five years we have no account of Virginia 
Quakers, save from Burnyeat, who has been quoted already. 
There are no other journalists, no manuscripts, no records. 
The blank comes to an end in 1672, when Virginia was 

^Journal, in Friends^ Lihi-ary^ XI., 144. 

'Neill's Virginia CaroZorif7?i/301-303. See also Wenlock Christi- 
son and the Early Fi^iends in Talbot County, Maryland, bj- Samuel 
A. Harrison, M. D., Baltimore, 1878. Christison visited Virginia 
in 1663. 



30 Southern Qi(aJ:ers and Slavery. 

visited by \\'illiani lulinundson and George Fox. From 
their visit the Society clearly began to revive. They may 
be said to have replanted Quakerism in Virginia, for under 
their ministrations the membership was more than doubled. 
Further, the American visit of Fox and Edmundson was 
pre-eminently a visit for organization. The Society had 
received a definite organization in England for the first 
time in 1669. In 1672 meetings for discipline were estab- 
lished in Virginia, and their earliest records, in which they 
recount the efforts of Fox in this direction, have been pre- 
served. The same was the case in Maryland. It was on 
this occasion that Edmundson and Fox laid the foundations 
of their Society in North Carolina. 

The history of Quakerism in Virginia and North Caro- 
lina is one. It is one in its origin, it is one in its develop- 
ment; it is one in its struggles; it is one in its protest against 
slavery; it is one in its decline. The two States will be 
treated as one. 

William Edmundson, the founder of Quakerism in North 
Carolina, was a man of rude eloquence, of earnest piety and 
shrewd common-sense. He showed unusual self-denial, and 
was charitable to a fault. Bom in 1627, he was apprenticed 
to a carpenter in York. As soon as his apprenticeship was 
over he joined the Parliamentary army and accompanied 
Cromwell to Scotland in 1650. He took part the next 
year in the battle of Worcester and the siege of the Isle of 
Man. In 1652 he was engaged in recruiting for the Scotch 
army. A little later he married and settled in Antrim, Ire- 
land, and opened a shop there. During a visit to England 
in 1653 'le again met with the Quakers and embraced their 
creed. He began to preach, and suffered numerous perse- 
cutions and imprisonments. From 1661 he was recognized 
as the leader of the Quakers in Ireland, and his house be- 
came practically the headquarters of the Society. In 1665 
he was exconununicated for not paying tithes, and suffered 
more persecutions. He first visited America with Fox in 
1672, and about .April. 1672, sailed from Maryland with 



Quakerism in Virginia a)id the Carol inas. 31 

three companions for Virj^inia/ He traveled through Vir- 
ginia, where he found "things were much out of order" as 
regards church discipHne. He had several powerful meet- 
ings among them, got their minds a little settled, and passed 
on to Albemarle, in the northeast corner of the present 
State of North Carolina. 

The fact that none of the traveling Friends had visited 
Albemarle before Edmundson is conclusive proof that no 
Friends were there. The visit of Edmundson was full of 
importance to that little colony. This was about the first of 
May, 1672. He had two companions, whose names have 
been lost. They do not deserve remembrance, however, for 
they were " weak-spirited " men and deserted their leader in 
his hour of need. They were probably little more than 
guides picked up in Virginia for the journey. He encoun- 
tered many natural obstacles, and tells most graphically of a 
night spent in the primitive forest. " It being dark, and the 
woods thick, I walked all night between two trees; and 
though very weary, I durst not lie down on the ground, for 
my clothes were wet to my skin. I had eaten little or noth- 
ing that day, neither had I anything to refresh me but the 
Lord." ' In the morning -he and his t^vo companions reached 
the house of Henry P4«Hlp'§,s situate on "Albemarle" (Per- 
quimans) river, where the town of Hertford now stands.^ 
Phillips "and his Wife had been convinced of the truth in 
New England, and came here to live; and not having seen 
a Friend for seven years before, they wept for joy to see us." 
Edmundson reached the house of Phillips on Sunday morn- 
ing and desired him to appoint a meeting for about noon 
of the same day. Many people attended the services, " but 
they had little or no religion, for they came and sat down in 
the meeting smoking their pipes." But the power of God 
was there; some of their hearts were softened and they "re- 
ceived the testimony." One Tems (T'oms),'a justice of the 
peace, and hi§*wif^ were among the converts. They desired 

' Fox's Journal, II., 146. ^Journal, ed. 1774, 66-68. 

''Moore, History of North Carolina, I., 20, quoting Martin, I., 155. 



32 Southnii Qual-ers and Slavery. 

the preacher to ht)ld a meeting at their house, which was 
about three miles off and " on the other side of the w^ater." 
A meeting was held there the next day, and with success, 
'■ for several were tendered with a sense of the power of 
God. received the truth and abode in it." Edmundson left 
Albemarle on Tuesday of the same week and returned to 
Virginia. 

Thus ended the first missionar}^ journey to North Caro- 
lina. It lasted but three days; only two sermons were 
preached, but here is the beginning of the religious life of 
a great State and here were laid the foundations of the So- 
ciety of Friends. 

Before tracing further the history of Friends in North 
Carolina it is necessary for us to go backwards a little. The 
beginnings of this State are shrouded in mystery. We do 
not know the time settlements were begun. A permanent 
government was first organized in 1664.' We know noth- 
ing of the religious feeling of these settlers. They probably 
leaned to the Established Church. 

Until recent years it has been the fashion to parade these 
settlers as religious refugees. Historians have delighted to 
represent the province as a home for the weary and op- 
pressed of every sect and nation, as a common refuge for the 
lovers of soul-liberty the world over. The belief seems to 
have started with Williamson, — on what authority we can- 
not say, unless it was a misreading of Hening's Statutes at 
Lar^c of ]lrgi?iia. He has been followed by Martin, 
Wheeler, Hawks and Aloore.' 

'For an account of the organization of the government see my 
paper on William Druininond. first Governor of North Carolina, 
1064-1C07, in TIk- Natiunal Magazine, April, 1892. 

*It li.-i'^ alwayH been believed that F. X. Martin would, under no 
circMuiistance.s, warp the facts of history to ])rove a theory. But we 
know that he has deliberately done this in the case of the Quaker set- 
tlers of Nortli (Janjlina. About 1808 Martin wrote to the North Caro- 
lina Yearly Meeting recjuestinp; an account, for his liistory, of their 
first setthMnent ami j^rowth in the State. This information was 
furnislied iiiin.and a copy of the reply, dated 15th of lOtii month, 1808, 
and siKued by Francis White. w:is preserved. Tliis copy came to 
light and was published by Cliarles F. Coflin, in Friends" Review, 



Quakerism in Virginia and the Carolinas. 33 

The belief has become incarnated in the person of George 
Durant, who gave his name to a neck of land in lower Per- 
quimans County. He was the first white man of whose 
settlement within the bounds of North Carolina we have dis- 
tinct record. He purchased the tract of land between Per- 
quimans and Little rivers from the Indians in 1662. He 
spent the remainder of his days in Perquimans, and died 
there probably not long before February, 1694,' as his will 
was presented for probate at that time. 

Mr. Bancroft has suggested that Durant might be the ■ q \ 
same as the Mr. Durand who was an elder in the Puritan ft-^^-^ 
"very, orthodox Church" in Nansemond County, Va., and 
who was banished from Virginia by Sir William Berkeley in 
1648." Building on this suggestion as a basis, some have 
made Durant a Presbyterian,'' but the favorite belief has been 
that he was a Quaker. This view has be^ai ^j^augth ened. 
no doubt, by the fact that he purchased' ]|ii 
Indians instead of taking them /after the ^uauaiJEjigns 

Durant was a leader in the coloye^, and _j^sfts. aitomev- 
general in 1679.* This does not iA^cjibej, however, tha^j'^e;/ 
was not a Quaker, as others claim, for^^^ellai^J^^^^ 
dale and Akehurst and Toms were all Quakers, yet held 
high offices under the colonial government; but the part 
taken by Durant in the Culpeper uprising does indicate that 
he was not a member of the Society of Friends. This 
movement was severely denounced by the Society, who de- 
clared themselves a " separated people," and that they " stood 

1808-59, vol. xii, pp. 532-534. 548-550. This narrative begins with 
Eilmunrison anrl Fox. and tVip writer had evidently seen their ,iour- 
nals. He "states that this [Edmundson's] appears to have bpen the 
first meeting of Friends held in North Carolina." He gives the 
nanips and dates correctly. A reference to Martin (I.. 119. 155) 
will convince the reader that these variations could not have been 
accidental. 

'C"Z. -Rec, I., 393. ^Hif^t. U. S.. IT. 134 note. ed. 1837. 

^ So lias Dr. Vass in his History of the Preshj/terian Church in Neiv 
Bern. N C. p. 11. following Bancroft's United States and Charles 
Ca m phe 1 1 's Virginia. 

*Col. Eec, I.; 317. 



34 Southern QuaJicrs and Slavery. 

single from all the seditious actions " which occurred in 
1677, 167S and 1679.' If Durant was a Quaker, how could 
his Society denounce the movement so severely and yet 
consistently refrain from expelling from its communion one 
of its own members who was a leader in it? 

Further, Rt. Rev. Joseph Blount Cheshire, Jr., D. D., 
Bishop of the Diocese of North Carolina, who has seen the 
family Bible of George Durant, son of the settler, tells me 
that there are no Quaker phrases in the genealogical entries 
there. We might have expected some of these, like JiJ'st 
day, first moiitli, etc., to have remained, even after the faith 
of the family had changed. 

It is to be remembered also that when George Fox visited 
Perquimans and Pasquotank counties in 1672 it was neces- 
sary for him to pass on his journey within sight of Durant's 
house, and although Durant was one of the most prominent 
men in the colony, and w^e may suppose he would have been 
the same in the Society, Fox made no mention whatever of 
him in his journal. Still stronger testimony of his non- 
membership with the Society is shown by the fact that his 
name nowhere appears in the original journals of the 
Friends. 

The writer has found no contemporary evidence to prove 
that George Durant was either a Quaker when he came to 
the colony, that he ever became a convert to that faith, or 
that he professed any form of religion whatever. 

As the claims of Durant to Quakerism have gone glim- 
mering, so has gone the broader claim of settlement by relig- 
ious refugees. The first person to attack the theory was 
Doctor, now Bishop, Cheshire; then came Col. William L. 
Saunders in the Prefatory Notes to the first volume of the 
North Carolina Colonial Records. The arguments against 
this claim are derived from three separate sources: (i) From 
the Dissenters themselves, (2) from the Church party, (3) 
from other contemporary authorities. Briefly stated, they 

•ro/. Rec, I., 250-253. 



Quakerism in Virginia and the Carolinas. 35 

may be summarized as follows: There is no evidence in the 
journal of William Edmundson to indicate that he found 
any sort of religious belief at all emphasized when he came 
on a missionary tour to the Province in 1672. He mentions 
one Quaker family only. There is no indication that Fox 
found many Quakers when he arrived in November of the 
same year, and those whom he found were most probably 
converts of Edmundson. But when the latter visited them 
in 1676-77 he found Friends " finely settled," and " there 
was no room for the priests." This change inside of four 
years indicates that much work had been done by those who 
had been convinced in 1672. It indicates also that there 
were no religious refugees of other denominations in North 
Carolina, for had there been such the success of the Quakers 
could not have been so marked; nor have the Quakers 
themselves set up the claim that they were the first settlers. 

Further, Governor Walker, writing in 1703, says the 
Quakers began with Fox's visit, and in 1709 William Gor- 
don, missionary of the Society for the Propagation of the 
Gospel, denies that the Quakers were the first settlers. 

Again, Governor Johnston said in 1749 that North Caro- 
lina was first settled by people seeking " a larger and better 
range for their stocks." Lawson, in his history, first pub- 
lished in 1709, attributes the first planting of the colony to 
economic motives, and in 1666 Thomas Woodward, the 
surveyor-general of Albemarle, says it is " land only that 
they come for." ^ 

We may safely conclude that in 1672, when Edmundson 
arrived in Albemarle, there was only one Quaker family in 
the colony. This was the family of Henry Phillips, and Ed- 
mundson went directly to his house. Phillips came to Albe- 
marle in 1665, and his is the only case of immigration in the 
earliest days of the colony that bears on its face any indica- 

' For an extensive examination of the former views and the argu- 
ments against them, see my Religious Development in the Province 
of North Carolina, Johns Hopkins University Studies in Historical 
and Political Science, IX., 239-306, 1892. In this I follow substan- 
tially the lines of argument laid down by Bishop Cheshire. 



36 SoiitJtrrn Quakers and Slavery. 

tions of religious persecution/ The religious meeting at 
his house was in all probability the first ever held in Albe- 
marle, and Edmundson, the Quaker, was the first to pro- 
claim there the gospel of peace. 

After preaching at two places in North Carolina, which 
was then called Albemarle, Edmundson returned to Virginia 
and held meetings in what is now, no doubt, Nansemond 
County. He visited " several places in that country," and 
traveled thirty miles above Jamestown to Green Spring, 
where there were Friends. A meeting had been settled here, 
" but was lost, the people being stumbled in their minds, and 
scattered by the evil example of one Thomas Newhouse, 
who had been a preacher among them, and went from truth 
into filth and uncleanness of the world." These Friends 
were restored. On his return he held meetings at William 
\\''right's house, which was probably in Nansemond, " and 
a blessed, heavenly meeting it was; many were tendered by 
the Lord's power." His meetings grew in size and so did 
the Society. Some of the converts were men of prominence, 
among them being Major-General Richard Bennett, the first 
governor sent out to Virginia by Cromwell. . " He was a 
brave, solid, wise man, received the truth and died in the 
same." Edmundson also visited Governor Berkeley, seek- 
ing some relief for Friends who " were great sufiferers in the 
spoiling of their goods." He found the Governor " very 
peevish and brittle, and I could fasten nothing upon him 
with all the soft arguments I could use." It was in connec- 
tion with this visit that General Bennett drew a picture of 
Berkeley, summing up his career in a nutshell. " He asked 
me if the governor called me dog, rogue, &c.? I said. no. 
he did not call me so. Then said he, you took him in his 
best humor, they being his usual terms when he is angr\', 
for he is an enemy to every appearance of good." From 

' Col. Rec, I., 215. A petition signed by Quakera in 1679 says 
that tiiost «)f tlic'tii h:\(] livnd in Albeinnrle since 16G3 or 1664. but it 
does not follow that they came as Quakers. — Ibid.. I., 250-253. 



Quakerism in Virginia and the CaroUnas. 37 

Virginia Edmundson traveled into Maryland,' having la- 
bored seven weeks in the two colonies.' 

We left George Fox going over t9 the Eastern Shore.' In 
a day or two he set out for New England. He labored there, 
then returned to Maryland, held meetings on both sides of 
the Bay, and on the fifth of November set sail for Virginia 
from Patuxent River. In three days they came to Nance- 
mund (Nansemond).* Fox reached it by going down Pa- 
tvixent River, down Chesapeake Bay and up Nansemond 
River. Here a great meeting was held. To this meeting 
came one Col. Dewes, " with several ofBcers and magistrates, 
who were much taken with the declaration of truth." Then 
Fox "hastened towards Carolina; yet had several meetings 
by the way, wherein we had good service for the Lord: one 
about four miles from Nancemum water, which was very 
precious; and there was a men's and a women's meeting 
settled, for the affairs of the church. Another very good 
meeting we had at William Yarrow's, at Pagan Creek, which 
was so large that we were fain to be abroad, the house not 
being big enough to contain the people. A great openness 
there was, the sound of truth spread abroad, and had a good 
favor in the hearts of people: the Lord have the glory for- 
ever! "° 

" After this," Fox continues, " our way to Carolina grew 
worse, being much of it plashy, and pretty full of great bogs 
and swamps; so that we were commonly wet to the knees, 
and lay abroad a-nights in the woods by a fire: saving one 
of the nights we got to a poor house at Summertown [Som- 
erton], and lay by the fire." The whole of this itiner- 
ary can be traced pretty clearly; coming down the Chesa- 
peake and sailing up Nansemond River, as we have seen, 
Fox and his companions, Robert Widders, James Lancaster 

^Journal, 68-72. 'Fox's Journal, II., 153. ^Ibid., II.. 146. 

*Itis to be noticed that all of these early Friends refer to the 
southeastern corner of the present State as ''Virginia." 

^Journal, II., 161, 162. This establishment Of a regular meeting 
for discipline indicates that the Society was now organized and 
moving forward. 



38 Southern Quakers and Slavery, 

and George Pattison/ probably took horse before they 
^ ; reached the Widow Wright's. They entered North Carohna 
'^ ' by way of Somerton, Va., and went by canoe down Bennett's 
^ Creek, called by Fox Bonner's Creek, into " Macocomocock 
^ river," which is doubtless the modern Chowan, to the house of 
H ^ Hugh Smith, "where people of other professions came to see 
us (no Friends inhabiting that part of the country)." This 
house was probably situate in the western part of the present 
county of Chowan. " Then passing down the river Mara- 
tick * in a canoe, we went down the bay Connie-oak [Eden- 
ton] to a captains who was loving to us and lent us his boat 
(for we were much wetted in the canoe, the water plashing in 
upon us). With this boat we went to the governor's; but 
the water in some places was so shallow, that the boat being 
loaden, could not swim ; so that we put off our shoes and 
stockings, and waded through the water a pretty way." The \ , . 
Governor's residence was probably near Edenton. Fox says ^_,^ 
he and his wife received them " lovingly," but they found a 
sceptic in the person of a certain doctor, who " would needs 
dispute with us," declaring that the light and the spirit of 
God were not in the Indians, and who " ran out so far that 
at length he would not own the Scriptures." 

" We tarried at the Governor's that night; and next morn- 
ing he very courteously walked with us about two miles 
through the woods, to a place whither he had sent our boat 
about to meet us. Taking leave of him, we entered our 
boat and went about thirty miles to Joseph Scot's, one of 
the representatives of the country [probably in Perquimans. f\ 
near Pasquotank County]. There we had a sound, precious ^^ 

' Lancaster was a resident of Lancashire and became a convert 
of Fox in 1652. He was perhajis more closely identified with Fox 
in his hahors tlian any one else. He accomjjanied him on his travels 
in America, was witli liim on !i visit to Scotland in 1057, to Ireland 
in iC'iO, and acted as his private secretary. Widders {c. 1018-1686) 
was also a Lancashire man and was also associated with Fox in his 
work. II<; was witli him in Scotland, and traveled much in western 
England. sufTi-rrd mucli and wsis '' a thunderinj^ man.'' — Bowden, 
L. I'JO. 421, and Pictji Promoted. I., 141. 

*Iii the last edition of Fox's Janrual this is given as Roanoke 
River. 



Quakerism i)i Virginia and the Carolina^. 39 

meeting; the people were tender, and much desired after 
meetings. Wherefore at an house about four miles further, 
we had another meeting; to which the Governor's secretary- 
came, who was chief secretary of the province, and had been 
formerly convinced." 

Fox also went among the Indians and spoke to them by 
an interpreter, and " having visited the north part of Carolina, 
and made a little entrance for the truth among the people 
there, we began to return again towards Virginia, having 
several meetings in our way, wherein we had good service 
for the Lord, the people being generally tender and open. 
... In our return we had a very precious meeting at Hugh 
Smith's . . . the people were very tender, and very good 
service we had amongst them. . . . The ninth of the tenth 
month we got back to Bonner's creek . . . having spent 
about eighteen days in the north of Carolina.^ 

" Our horses having rested, we set forward for Virginia 
again, traveling through the woods and bogs as far as we 
could well reach that day, and at night lay by a fire in the 
woods. Next day we had a tedious journey through bogs 
and swamps, and were exceedingly wet and dirty all the day, 
but dried ourselves at night by a fire. We got that night to 
Sommertown. . . . Here we lay in our clothes by the fire 
as we had done many a night before. Next day we had a 
meeting; for the people . . . had a great desire to hear us; 

^ Fox's Journal, II., 159-163. This journey has many perplexing 
problems. Fox evidently went down Bennett's Creek, which he 
calls Bonner's Creek, and got into Macocomocock River. This could 
only be the Chowan, for Bennett's Creek empties into the Chowan. 
But immediately on leaving Hugh Smith's they are in Maratick 
River, which is the name then applied to Roanoke River and Albe- 
marle Sound. Colonel Saunders thought Connie-Oak Bay the 
modern Edenton Bay, and he is doubtless correct. Did Joseph Scott 
live in Perquimans? Who was the Governor and his chief secre- 
tary ? Was Peter Carteret Governor at this time V The colony of 
Albemarle is often called Roanoke by the early writers, and is 
" Nathaniel Batts who had been governor of Roanoke " one of the 
lost governors of Albemarle V Is he kin to the " Nathaniel Battson " 
mentioned in Heniug, I., 383, 385 V He was known as Capt. Batts, 
and Fox again speaks of him in a letter to Virginia Friends in 1673 
as "Captain Batts, the Governor." — Bowden, I., 412. 



40 SoKtheni QiiaJi-crs and Slavery. 

and a very good meeting we had among them, where we 
never had one before." After traveUng about a hundred 
miles from CaroHna into Virginia they were again among 
Friends. They spent about three weeks in Virginia, mostly 
among Friends. They had large and precious meetings. 
At the Widow Wright's " many of the magistrates, officers 
and other high people came. A most heavenly meeting we 
had; wherein the power of the Lord was so great, that it 
struck a dread upon the assembly, chained all down, and 
brought reverence upon the people's minds." The parish 
priest threatened to interfere, " but the Lord's power . . . 
stopped him. . . . The people were wonderfully affected with 
the testimony of truth. . . . Another very good meeting we 
had at Crickatrough, at which many considerable people 
were, who had never heard a Friend before; and they were 
greatly satisfied, praised be the Lord! We had also a very 
good and serviceable meeting at John Porter's which con- 
sisted mostly of other people, in whicli the power of the 
Lord was gloriously seen and felt, and it brought the truth 
over all the bad walkers and talkers; blessed be the Lord!" 

During the last week of his stay Fox spent time and pains 
correcting evils that had come into the Society and in " work- 
ing down a bad spirit that was got up in some," and then, 
" having finished what service lay upon us at Virginia, the 
thirtieth of the tenth month [30 December, 1672] we set sail 
in an open sloop for Maryland." ' 

Thus ended the only visit of George Fox to Virginia and 
Carolina. It was his good fortune to see his Society organ- 
ized and prospering in each. In Virginia the number of 
Friends was more than doubled In- his preaching, while "a 
large convincement " was upon many others who liad not 
yet professed. The connection between these bodies and 
the English societies was close. An exchange of letters 
began. Fox sent copies of Edward Burrough's UW/cs to 
Col. Thomas Dewes at Nansemond; to Major-General r)en- 



' Fox's Journal, II., 162, 168. 



Quakerism in Virginia and the Carolinas. 41 

nett; to Lieutenant-Colonel Waters, in Accomack; to Justice 
Jordan, near Accomack, in Potomac; to the Governor of 
Carolina, and others.' There was soon, no doubt, some sort 
of union between the meetings in Virginia and Carolina, but 
this has not been at any time an organic one, for the Quakers 
of North Carolina steadily fought against the idea of being 
absorbed by their Virginia neighbors. There has always 
been unity of thought and feeling between the Society in the 
two States and their history is one. 

No visiting Friends came to Virginia or Carolina from 
1672 until the return of Edmundson in 1676. We know 
that they were engaged during these years in missionary 
labors among the Indians from a letter of Fox to Virginia 
Friends in 1673, in which he says: "I have received letters 
giving me an account of the service some of you had with 
and amongst the Indian king and his council; and if you go 
over again to Carolina, you may inquire of Captain Batts, 
the governor, with whom I left a paper to be read to the 
emperor, and his thirty kings under him of the Tuscaroras." 
Later he exhorts Friends of Carolina as follows: "You 
should sometimes have meetings with the Indian kings and 
their people, to preach the gospel of peace, of life, and of sal- 
vation to them " "" ; and again in 1681 he urges this on 
Friends in Carolina. 

The next account we have of Southern Friends is from 
Edmundson, who again visited them in 1676-77.' He came 
down the Chesapeake from Maryland, entered a branch of 
Elizabeth River, and reached the house of one Yeats, where 
he had been before. He " had many precious meetings with 
Friends, both for the worship of God, and the afifairs of 

'Bowden, I.. 356-358. ''Ibid. I., 412. 

^Edmundson does not trouble himself to give dates. This jour- 
ney is usually put down as occurring in 1676, but I think it must 
have been made during the closing months of 1676 or the beginning 
of 1677, for he says that it was cold, with sleet and snow. He 
notes also the death of Nathaniel Bacon, which occurred October 1, 
1676, and that " several of his party were executed." I do not know 
that any of these executions took place earlier than January 11, 
1677.— Hening, II., 545. 



•42 Southern Qi((ikcr.s and Slavery. 

truth relating to gospel order. There was indeed need enough 
of help for things were much out of order, and many unruly 
spirits to deal with. I had good service and success, for the 
Lord blessed his work in my hand." Then comes a passage 
in the narrative that rings with Hebraic simplicity and shows 
the influence of his Puritan training. " Now I was moved of 
the Lord to go to Carolina, and it was perilous travelling, 
for the Indians were not yet subdued, but did mischief and 
murdered several; the place they haunted much was in that 
wilderness betsvixt Virginia and Carolina, scarce any durst 
travel that way unarmed: So Friends endeavored to dissuade 
me from going, ... so I delayed some time. ... In the 
mean time I appointed a meeting on the north side of James 
river, where none had been, and there came several Friends 
a great way to it in boats, there came also the widow Hout- 
land's eldest son, with whom I walked near two miles the 
night before the meeting, advising him of some disorders in 
the family, and so we parted; . . . but before morning a 
messenger came to tell me the young man was dead. . . . 

" Then the word of the Lord came to me, saying, All lives 
arc in my hand and if thou goest not to Carolina, thy life is 
as this young man's; but if thou goest, I will give thee thy 
life for a prev. . . The next day I made ready for my jour- 
ney.'" 

He seems to have gone over nearly the same route as in 
1672, but the difference in the forms of expression in his 
journal is significant. It is no longer the preacher who 
appoints the meetings, but we find that " they," the members, 
say when and where these should be held, indicating that 
the Society of Friends was now on a sure footing in North 
Carolina, and not unorganized and non-existent as it liad 
been in 1672. Edmundson held a meeting at the home of 
his old friend Toms, and says in concluding: " I had several 
precious meetings in that colony, and several turned to the 

'Ho liad as coiiipanioii, "one ancient man, a Friend," name 
unknown. 



Quakerism in Virginia and the Carolinas. 43 

Lord; people were tender and loving, and there was no 
room for the priests (i. e., hirelings), for Friends were finely 
settled and I left things well among them." He then re- 
turned to Virginia, had meetings in several places, settled 
things among Friends, sailed for England and saw America 
no more.' 

About 1678 John Boweter (c. 1629-1704), another Cum- 
berland man, visited Virginia. He appears to have traveled 
through most of the settled parts of the province, but no 
particulars of his journey have been preserved. He did not 
visit Carolina; we do not know the reason why. He has 
preserved the names of the places visited in Virginia: James 
River in Virginia, James River at Chuckatuck, Pagan Creek, 
Southward, Nansemun, Accomack, Pongaleg by Accomack 
shore, Pocomock Bay, Annamesiah, Moody Creek in Acco- 
mack, Savidge Neck, Nesswatakes, Ocahanack.^ 

The Society had more trouble in Virginia. In December, 
1680, the minutes of Friends on the Eastern Shore of Mary- 
land record: "The sad estate and condition of the church in 
Virginia being seriously considered by this meeting, it is the 
sense of the meeting that they should be visited for their 
good by such Friends as find a concern on their minds." 
William Berry and Stephen Keddy signified their willing- 
ness to go, and their object was doubtless to advise, encour- 
age and help.^ 

It is probable that this trouble was due to persecution by 
the Government. We have some instances of this from the 
records. As early as 1674 we find an order in the General 
Court records to proceed against conventicles in Nansemond 
County. And again (p. 218), under date of June 15, 1675, 
" The Hon'ble Governor being informed that there are Sev- 
eral conventicles in Nansemond County, it is ordered by 
this Court that if there be any meeting in this Countr}- that 
they be proceeded against according to the laws of England 

^Journal, 110 114 ; parts relating to North Carolina reprinted in 
Col. Rec, I.. 315,226. 
^Bowden, I., 359. = Januey, II., 359. 



44 S^oiithcni Qiitihrs and S^laren/. 

and this Country. Col. Bridger' is desired Strictly to Com- 
mand the Justices of Nansemond, Lower Norfolk, and the 
Isle of Wight counties to make Strict inquiry of the same. 
And if any person shall be found to meet, as aforesaid then 
they be proceeded as aforesaid." " 

On the same day we find a presentment against John Bigg 
for not baptizing his child (p. 218). It is more probable 
that he was a Quaker than a Baptist. " John Edwards in- 
forming against John Bigg, upon the act for not baptizing 
his children which appearing to this court it is ordered that 
the said John Bigg pay 1000 lbs tobacco and cask to the 
Said John Edwards and 1000 lbs tobacco & casks to the 
p'sh according to act and pay 1225 lbs. of tobacco & casks in 
full of his costs." 

In 1678 we learn that parties were fined for entertaining 
Quakers, and the next year, "At a Court held 21^* day g^^^ 
1679 Present His Majesties Dep* Governor & Council 
Order that if John Pleasants does not pay 1500 pounds of 
Tobacco — to Mr. Tho Cocke Jr his Costs & Charges in 
prosecuting a suit ag^^ ^ji-i-i ^ jf i-,^ ^q ^q^ ^^ ^^y^^ Hen"^ 
County Court give security that he will not suffer any meet- 
ing of Quakers at his house for the future then execution 
is to issue upon a former judgment obtained ag^' ye s^ 
Pleasants upon ye act of Assembly about Quakers."' 

Pleasants seems to have been particularly obnoxious to 
the powers of the day. In February, 1682, we find, " Infor- 
mation by Lt Col Tho« Grendon & W°^ Randolph that John 
Pleasants & Jane Tucker lias Larcomc alias Pleasants 
(Quakers) that they unlawfully accompany themselves to- 
gether in living as man & wife without legal marriage. That 
they have absented themselves from church for twelve 
months & upwards That they have refused to have their 

'It iij)p«'ar8 later that he was a Quaker sympatliizer, and there 
eeeiiiH to have been a number of prominent men who felt the same 
way. 

'Order made at a court held at James City, June 15, 1675, in the 
afternocju. Hir William Berkeley , Governor. 

^Minute Book, Henrico County Court, ]>. 116. 



Quakerism in Virginia and the Garolinas. 45 

children baptised. That said John Pleasants did Suffer a 
Convention at or near his house That they were present 
at said Convention. 

" Defts in open Court confsed the first & owned the breach 
of the peace laws 

"Judgment is granted said Lt Col Thos Grendon & W"' 
Randolph for 240I sterling that they give Security 2000 p^^^ 
Tobacco for refusing to have their children baptised, 500 
pounds Tob for being members of Convention & John 
Pleasants for suffering same 5000 p*^^ of Tobacco 

" Appeal taken by pleasants." ' 

Pleasants came from Norwich, England, in 1668, and was 
the founder of the Virginia family of that name." We do 
not know whether he was a Quaker when he came over, or 
whether he became a convert of Edmundson and Fox. As 
we have already seen, he was an important and prominent 
member among Virginia Quakers. On December 3, 1683, 
we have the instructions of the King to Lord Effingham, 
Governor of Virginia, " to represent the case of John Plais- 
ance, a Quaker, indicted in Henrico Co. for not coming to 
church and to continue to stop execution against him.'' ' 

These records indicate that life in Virginia for the Quaker 
during the seventeenth century was by no means an ideal 
one, free from religious vexations, trials, persecutions and 
fines. These entries will help to explain the troubles to 
which we find reference in the records of Maryland Friends. 
Much of this persecution came, no doubt, from a misunder- 
standing of Friends' principles; thus we find from the 
records of Accomac that Friends brought up for trial there 
were charged with " villifying the ministers, disobeying the 
laws, and blaspheming God." As their principles became 
better known and their numbers increased this persecution 
was less. Lord Culpeper, who became Governor in 1680, 

'Minutes. Henrico County Court, Feb., 16S2, to April, 1701. 

' Brock, A Colonial Virginian- 

'Sainsbury, Extracts from English Public Records. 



4G SoiifhcDt Qualrr.'^ and Slavery. 

is said to have particularly manifested a desire to save them 
from persecution/ 

There was Hkewise some trouble in North Carolina. The 
Half-Yearly Meeting of Maryland writes to Fox in 1683: 
" Here are many Friends of this province who find a concern 
laid upon them to visit the seed of God in Carolina, for we 
understand that the spoiler makes havoc of the flock there; 
so here are many weighty Friends, intending [to go] down 
there on that service, and may visit Virginia and Accomack 
and then we may inform thee how things are on truth's 
account in those places." " This probably refers to the mili- 
tia fines that we shall examine later. 

The organization of the Society went on in the midst of 
persecution. It is doubtful if there was any organization in 
Virginia beyond the particular meetings or individual con- 
gregations prior to the coming of Edmundson and Fox in 
1672. We know that monthly and quarterly meetings were 
established in England in 1669 and that the Yearly Meeting 
followed soon after. It is not at all probable that any defi- 
nite plan of organization could have been evolved among the 
feeble meetings in America. We may safely conclude that 
monthly and quarterly meetings were organized in Vir- 
ginia by Fox in 1672. He tells us that he settled a men's 
and women's meeting, presumably a monthly meeting, in 
eastern Virginia. Burnyeat had advised them the year be- 
fore to have a men's meeting,' and w^e know that organiza- 
tion in Maryland dates from Fox's visit. We know also 
that the Henrico Monthly Meeting was organized as early as 
1698, perhaps a little earlier. In Virginia in 1700 there was 
one quarterly, with two, possibly three, monthly meetings. 
The Virginia Yearly Meeting seems to have been organized 
not later than 1698. 

Bowden states (I., 425) that there were half-yearly meet- 
ings in Virginia and Carolina in 1682. We have the records 



' McIIwairio, pp. 26-28. 'Bowden, I., 385, 386. 

^ JoiiriKil. in 1' riends'' Library, XI., 1.34. 



Quakerism in Virginia and the Carolinas. 47 

of a monthly meeting' in Perquimans County, N. C, as early 
as 1680. In that year Christopher Nicholson and Ann At- 
wood announce their intention of marriage before a " general 
meeting." It was deferred for the space of " one month." 
The parties were married nth of 2d month, 1680 (April). 
These records are said by the committee of copyists ap- 
pointed in 1728 to be the earliest records that were kept in 
Carolina. This was a men's and women's meeting, and was 
kept at the house of Francis Toms. A men's and women's 
meeting was also held at Henry Prows's, and on loth of 7th 
month, 1681, a six weeks' meeting was established at Chris- 
topher Nicholson's, and a six weeks' meeting was established 
at said Prows's "at Little River." "At a quarterly meet- 
ing" held at Christopher Nicholson's, 2d of loth month 
(1681, year shown by context), it was concluded that a 
monthly meeting be established at the house of Jonathan 
Phelps, the first fourth day in every month. I take it that 
these were monthly meetings for business and that this was 
the organic beginning of the Society in the colony. We 
find also in nth month, 1684(85), mention of a monthly 
meeting held at the house of William Wyat, at Yopim." It 
seems to have been a meeting for worship only. As the 
Pasquotank Monthly Meeting goes back to this early period 
also, I conclude that in 1700 there were three monthly meet- 
ings, one in Pasquotank, one held at the house of Francis 
Toms, and the third at the house of Jonathan Phelps. The 
last two were located in Perquimans County, as was the 
quarterly meeting. 

The date of the organization of North Carolina Yearly 
Meeting has been preserved : " at a quarterly meeting at the 
house of henry whites this 4 day of the 4 month 1698: it is 
unaninus agreed by fr'nds that all the quarterly meetings be 
altered from: the first seventh day of month to the last 
seventh day and that all the quarterly meeting be held the 
last seventh day of the same month they were formerly held 
on and the last seventh day of the 7 month in Euery yere to 
be the yerely meeting for this Cuntree at the house of francis 



48 tSu tit hern (J ua leers and IS la car y. 

toonis the Elder and the second day of the weke following 
to be seat aparte for Inisines and that a meeting be held at 
the house of Thomas Catreke in pastotanke the first day 
Euery month." 

By what body were these meetings set up? New Eng- 
lantl Yearly Meeting, the first in America, covered all the 
colonies, of course. In 1683 it was set of¥ from London 
Yearly Meeting as a regular Yearly ^Meeting for discipline. 
Philadelphia Yearly Meeting was first held in Ikirlington, 
X. J., in 1 68 1. It was held there again in 1683, and then 
embraced the meetings as far northward as New England 
and as far southward as Carolina. The Yearly Meeting of 
1684, held in Philadelphia, had delegates from Herring 
Creek and Choptank in Maryland, but none from the meet- 
ings farther south ; but in a letter to Friends in England they 
say: " We are to send an epistle to Carolina, Virginia, Mary- 
land and all thereaway." ' This was doubtless the first or- 
ganic relation Virginia and Carolina had had wuth others, 
and it leads us to the conclusion that the cjuarterly and 
yearly meetings in these Southern colonies were established 
by Philadelphia Yearly Meeting instead of London Yearly 
Meeting, as some have held. 

These meetings were of enough importance for Philadel- 
phia Yearly Meeting to note the fact in its records in 1686 
that no delegates appeared from them. But about this time 
George Hutchinson, of Burlington, N. J., and James Martin, 
a member of Philadelphia meeting, traveled in Maryland, 
Virginia and Carolina. They gave an account of their ser- 
vice to the meeting of ministers (and elders) in February, 
1686(87). "They found their travel among Friends there 
very acceptable and a door was opened on Truth's account." 
Wc have no other information concerning Friends in Vir- 
ginia and Carolina until the visits of Dickinson and Wilson 
in 1691-92. 

' Ezra Mirlinor, h'pfraspecf i<f Early Qvnkerixm, pp. 22. 29. See 
also the recortl.s of Pliiliulelpliia Yearly Meeting. 



Quakerism in Virginia and the Carolinas. 49 

The first settlement in South Carolina, unlike that in 
North Carolina, has a definite beginning. It dates from 
the landing of a colony, under command of Governor Wil- 
liam Sayle, on the shores of Kiawah River, now called Ash- 
ley, in April, 1670. Here they laid out a town. Ten years 
later the site was changed from Albemarle Point to Oyster 
Point, and there Charleston was built. The government of 
this colony, civil and religious, was the same as that of Al- 
bemarle. There was no Establishment until 1698. 

Quakers were in South Carolina as early as 1681. We 
do not know their origin further than that they came by sea, 
and doubtless direct from England. In 1682 their Society 
was small, but a monthly meeting had been established, 
probably by London Yearly Meeting, and they enjoyed lib- 
erty. Their " yea " was taken instead of an oath, and they 
served alike in the Assembly, on juries and in other ofilices. 
In 1 68 1 Fox suggested an organic union with the Society 
in North Carolina: "If you of Ashley River and that way, 
and you of Albemarle River and that way, had once a year 
or once in half a year, a meeting together somewhere in the 
middle of the country, it might be well." ' It does not seem 
that this program was immediately carried into effect, for 
communication between the colonies was difficult and te- 
dious. There was a stretch of territory several hundred miles 
wide between the two which was unexplored and inhabited 
by savages. Edmundson and Fox got no further south than 
Albemarle, and it was not until well in the eighteenth cen- 
tury that we find Friends undertaking this hazardous jour- 
ney overland. 

1 Janney, II., 359, 361 ; Bowden, I., 413. 



CHAPTER IV. 

John Archdalk and the Golden Age of 
Southern Quakerism. 

The heyday of Quakerism in the South is indissolubly 
connected with the name of John Archdale, Governor-Gen- 
eral of CaroHna. To CaroHna Friends the seventeenth cen- 
tury was a Golden Age, a time of ease and of release from 
the restraints of Church and State. The Society grew in 
numbers and importance, and its cosmopolitan character 
made Friends the connecting link with the outside world. 

We have already seen that a quarterly and three monthly 
meetings, the executive bodies of the Society, had been es- 
tablished in North Carolina before 1700. Friends seem to 
have fixed also on definite places of worship, for in 1698 we 
find an cntr}- which directs " that meeting houses be kept 
decent and in good repair." This would indicate that the 
meeting house had now become a part of their regular ex- 
pense, but of their location, or whether they were the dwell- 
ings of Friends that had attained a semi-public character, 
we do not know. In 1702 a request for help in fornnilating 
and establishing church discipline went up from \^irginia 
and North Carolina to Philadelphia Yearly Meeting. This 
would indicate that they were then undertaking to put into 
practice some system or arrangement which had not been 
tried before. A committee was appointed to attend to the 
matter, and seem to have sent an answer to both provinces. 
The one to North Carolina is addressed to " The Yearly, 
Quarterly and Monthly Meetings of Friends in North Caro- 
lina." It is signed by Samuel Jennings, GrifTfith Owen, 
Nicholas Wain, John I'lunstone, Antho. Morris, and is 



John Archdale and Southern Quakerism. 51 

dated i8th of 7th mo., 1703/ The records of North Caro- 
lina Yearly Meeting begin with 1708. 

The records show that Friends were coming into Albe- 
marle (North Carolina) from Pennsylvania and Ireland prior 
to 1690, but we know little of their history from the visit of 
Edmundson to North Carolina in 1676-77, and of Boweter 
to Virginia in 1678, until the coming of Wilson and Dickin- 
son in 1692. Under date of 1685 Bowden (II., 52) quotes a 
passage from a London epistle which expresses joy that 
some Friends in Pennsylvania and New Jersey " were stirred 
up in the spirit and power of the Lord to visit the churches 
of Christ in New England, Virginia, Maryland and Caro- 
lina." But we have no account of any visits coming from 
this determination. 

Thomas Wilson and James Dickinson landed in New 
York in November, 1691; they traveled south, first visited 
the Eastern Shore, and about January, 1692, passed over the 
bay to James River, Virginia. They had " many good and 
comfortable meetings," and " went from Virginia towards 
North Carolina, where the floods were so great, that we could 
not travel on horseback, but waded bare foot through swamps 
and waters; Friends and people were exceedingly glad to 
see us, they not having had any visit by a travelling Friend 
of the ministry for several years before. We had good ser- 
vice amongst them, for the Lord's heavenly power wonder- 
fully supported us under our difficulties and hard travel, the 
country being so full of wild creatures, that wolves would 
come and roar about the houses in the night time. So after 
having had many good and heavenly meetings with Friends 
there, we took leave of them and returned through the wil- 
derness to Virginia." At Chuckatuck, in Nansemond 
County, they warned Friends " to keep out of the superflu- 
ous fashions of the world," and traveled toward the falls of 
James River; they had some meetings here and "found a 

'A copy of the letter is in the archives of Philadelphia Yearly 
Meeting, in 1702 we find James Bates, of Virginia, in Philadelphia. 
Some North Carolina Friends were there about the same time. 
They may have brought up the request for assistance. 



52 Southern Qmilrrs and Shirvry. 

great openness among the people." At Black Creek the 
sheriff undertook to prevent them from speaking, but was 
induced to desist, and a successful meeting was held. From 
here they returned overland to Maryland.' 

Dickinson landed in Virginia again in July, 1696; held 
meetings at Queen's Creek; visited New Kent, where Friends 
"were glad to see us"; had a meeting at Curies, where he 
had been in 1692 with Wilson; had a dispute at Merchant- 
hope with a priest, and visited Chuckatuck. In Accomac 
County he met an Indian king', " who was a very solid man," 
and was pleased with the visit; to another Indian he also 
unfolded the doctrine of the Inner Light and advised him 
of the evil nature of swearing. " He said he never swore 
before he learned to speak English, for they had no swearing 
in their language; but so soon as they could speak English 
they learned to swear; but if he had more of my company I 
would teach him better, and wished he was a Quaker, then 
he would not swear." ' 

Dickinson then visited the North, and in the spring of 
1697 was again in Virginia. His destination was North 
Carolina, and Story tells us that Jacob Fallowfield was his 
companion.' They held meetings on the way; visited Friends 
at Pagan Creek and Chuckatuck; "so through the wilder- 
ness to Carolina, and there met with Governor Archdale, 
who traveled through Carolina with us. We had good ser- 
vice in that wilderness country, and found a tender people 
who were glad to be visited. Being clear, we returned in 
peace, and attended the shipping for England." * 

John Archdale was made Governor-General of Carolina, 
August 31, 1694.° His patent as a Landgrave of Carolina is 
dated Noveml)er 24, 1694, and his salary was £200 a year. 

•Dickinson's J()«j*naZ, in Fi'iends'' Library, XII., 381; Wilson's 
Journal, eil. 1784, 29-31. lu 1G93 Maryland. Virginia and North 
Carolina wero visited by Richard Iloskiiis, who had just settled in 
Pennsvlvania, but we liave no particulars of liis visit. — Bowden, 
II., r,2'. 

» FriendH' Lihran/, XII., 388-390. ^Story's JournaL ed. 1747, 156. 

* Friends' Library, XII., 896. » Col. Rec. I.. 389. 



John Archdale and Southern Quakerism. 53 

Less has been preserved concerning his career than we could 
desire. This is due, no doubt, in a large measure, to the 
overshadowing of Wilham Penn. Were pictures of Penn's 
government in Pennsylvania less vivid, the administration of 
Archdale in Carolina might be better known. 

The details of the life of John Archdale are few. The 
genealogy of the family has been traced to about 1520.^ In 
the reign of Elizabeth they were settled at Norton Hall, Nor- 
folk, and were in good circumstances. In 1604 Richard 
Archdale purchased of John Rounce the Loakes estate in 
Bucks County, which is now known as Wycombe Abbey 
and is the seat of Lord Carington. In 1628 he purchased 
from the same person the manors of " Temple Wycombe " 
and " Chapel Fee." It is probable that he thus became the 
principal landholder in the parish. About the time that 
Richard Archdale came to Bucks, his brother John received 
a grant of land from Elizabeth at Castle Archdale, County 
Fermanagh, Ireland, where that branch of the family has 
been established ever since, the present representative being 
Captain Edward Mervyn Archdale, of Castle Archdale and 
Trillick Castle, County Tyrone. The motto of both branches 
of the family is Da^a fata secutus} 

It seems probable that John Archdale, Governor of Caro- 
lina, was the son of Thomas Archdale, who was the son of 
that Richard Archdale who settled in Bucks in 1604. Rich- 
ard Archdale probably died before 1633, and John was born 
in 1642. His first connection with American afifairs seems 
to have been in 1664, when. he came out as agent of Gov- 
ernor Ferdinando Gorges, of Maine. In that year Sir Rob- 
ert Carr and Samuel Maverick, as royal commissioners, 
carried to Gov. Gorges two letters from the King, both bear- 
ing date June 11, 1664.* The first of these letters was to 

'By Rev. Geo. P. Jarvis, High Wycombe, Bucks, England. 

'Private information from Rev. W. H. Summers, Reading, Eng- 
land. 

^Article on Archdale in Quakeriana, May, 1894. Mr. Jarvis says 
Archdale was not the brother-in-law of Gorges, and not a commis- 
sioner with Carr and Maverick, as there stated. 



54 Southern Quakers and Slavery. 

the people of Maine, commanding them to submit to the 
government of Gorges. The second letter was to the Gov- 
ernor and Council of Massachusetts Bay, and was an order 
from the King to surrender Maine to Gov. Gorges. Arch- 
dale arrived in Maine in November, 1664, and on Novem- 
ber 30 was in Boston along with Henry Joslin and Edward 
Rushworth as commissioners for Gov. Gorges. The com- 
missioners sent a letter to the Massachusetts Council about 
the proposed surrender. The Governor and Council made 
reply that Maine was claimed by the colony of Massachu- 
setts and that they could not give it up without consent of 
the General Court. Archdale appealed to the King's com- 
missioners, and the General Court seems to have given its 
consent, for Archdale reported to the Council in England 
on Februar}^ 6. 1671(72), that the commissioners appointed 
by Gorges to govern the province met and summoned the 
inhabitants, who submitted to their rule; that about April, 
1665. the commissioners, being at York, summoned every 
town to send two deputies to a general council to be held at 
Wells in May, and that they met and enacted several laws. 
Gorges was confirmed in his possession by the King, April 
10. 1666: but after three years of quiet possession, the Gov- 
ernment of Massachusetts again took possession of Maine 
by force, turned out the officers and seized the records. The 
Board of Trade and Plantations heard the testimony of 
Archdale in the matter and recommended that Gorges be 
restored.' 

We learn from these records that Archdale was then a 
man of some maturity, and that he was not a Quaker, for he 
says that the Maine authorities elected him a colonel of 
militia in 1665, and that he held several private trainings. 
He probably returned to England in 1666, and we know 
little of his history for the next fifteen years. He probably 
lived at his country-seat during the period, for Isaac Milles, 



' Calendar of State Papers, Colonial Series, II., 258, 272, 492 ; III., 
54. 329. 



John Archdale and Southern Quakerism. 55 

the vicar of the parish, 1673-81, says that he was the " chief 
gentleman of the village." ' 

The first time we find Archdale mentioned in connection 
with Carolina is on March 26, 1681, when he commissioned 
Daniel Akehurst as his deputy." He was no doubt acting 
here as the representative of his minor son, for all papers 
are signed by " John Archdale for Thomas Archdale." This 
was not the share of Sir William Berkeley, as Dr. Hawks 
states,^ but from the materials before me I conclude that the 
share which came into the possession of Thomas Archdale 
in 1681 was that of Sir John Berkeley, who died in 1678, for 
the shares of Craven, Shaftesbury, Colleton, Albemarle, and 
Carteret were still in the original families; Sothel had pur- 
chased the share of Earl Clarendon,* Amy purchased that of 
Sir William Berkeley, and only that of Sir John Berkeley 
could have then been on the market." 

Archdale is said to have lived a loose and careless life, but 
the preaching of Fox, he says, " convinced . . . and separ- 
ated me from my father's house." " Since Isaac Milles, the 
vicar of the parish, bewails his apostasy, we may conclude 
that this occurred between 1673 and 1681. But this con- 
version does not seem to have been of any consequence as far 

'Milles was presented to this vicarate by Matthew Archdale, 
probablv tlie uncle of John. Matthew Archdale made presenta- 
tions in'ieeO, 1664, 1669. 1673, and probably in 1681. In 1661 he 
took part in the persecution of Quakers and arrested Isaac Pen- 
ninojton and Thomas Ellwood at Chalfont St. Peter. 

2S. C. Hist. Soc. Colls.. I.. 104. 

^ Histoi'y of North Carolina, II., 499. 

^Col. Rec, I., 339. 

^Ibid., I., 345. Mav25, 1681, a letter was sent to the Governor and 
Council of Ashley River, in which it is said Mr. Archdale had 
bought "Lady Berkeley's share."— S. C. Hist. Soc. Colls., I., 106. 
The Wheeler MSS. say that Archdale purchased Sir William Berke- 
ley's share in 1679. also that Archdale held the rank of Chief Jus- 
tice of Carolina in 1681. 

^ Letter to Fox, reprinted in Hawks 's North Carolina. II. , 378, from 
Bowden, I.. 415. It is said also that Archdale was turned Quaker 
by the writings of Henry More, the Platouist. Isaac Milles took 
counsel with Rev. Timothy Borage, vicar of Marlow, and Henry 
Dodwell, Camden Professor of History at Oxford, about winning 
Archdale back to the Church. They asked More to write a letter 
to Archdale, giving a true idea of the light within and refuting the 



56 Son(Jurii Quakers and Slavery. 

as the manag^cment of their share of Carolina is concerned. 
We know, from instructions sent to Governor Sothel, 
that he was in Albemarle on December 14, 1683, or earlier, 
" and that he [Sothel] do forthwith with the advice of Mr. 
Archdale choose four of the discreetest honest men of the 
county," etc' Again, in February, 1685, the Proprietors 
write Sothel about the same matter and insist that he, " with 
the advice of Mr. Archdale," fill certain blanks with names 
of men who were to serve as Lords Proprietors' deputies.^ 
From the letter quoted above we know that he was also in 
North Carolina in March, 1686. It is probable, then, that 
he came out to Carolina in a year or two after he became a 
virtual Proprietor, to look after the common interests, and 
while there his co-religionists, the Quakers, were not al- 
lowed to feel the need of any help he was able to give them. 
His presence did much, no doubt, to give them prestige in 
the colony, to protect them from persecution, should such 
be attempted, and to increase their numbers. During the 
temporary absence of Sothel from Albemarle in 1685 and 
1686, Archdale acted as Governor of that colony, whether 
by the special appointment of that infamous dignitar}-, or 
because of his position as a virtual Proprietor, we do not 
know. It is probable that he was in Carolina during this 
visit for three years or more, for in a letter written in 1705 
he says that he had lived five years in Carolina in all, and his 
visit in 1695-97 ^^as hardly more than tvvo years in duration. 
When made Governor-General of Carolina he was not 



Quaker belief. In reply More sent an unsealed letter to the trio. 
They were to read. Real, and forward to Archdale, but after read- 
ing thf h'tter over two or three times they judf^ed it best to suppress 
it. as more likely to confirm than to convince him of error. The 
effort to redeem John seems to have resulted in keeping: some of 
his family from leaving; the Established Church. — See Hfeinoi-ies of 
Jordaits niid the Chalfonts, by Rev. W. H. Summers (London, 1895), 
pp. 2i:r2ir). 

' Cnl. AVc. I.. 346. July 29, 1082, a blank commission was piven 
Archdale to receive the (juit rents due the Proprietors in Albemarle 
(S. C. Mist. Soc. Colls., I.. 105). This would indicate that he was 
then preparing to come out. 

■'Col. Rcc... I.. 350, 851. 



Jolm Archdale and Southern Quakerism. 57 

yet a Proprietor, for his name is not on the list of " the true 
and absolute Lords and Proprietors," and we learn from a 
ccmmunication to the commissioners of customs, dated 
November lo, 1696, that he was administering the share of 
the proprietorship for his own son, who was a minor.' He 
came into this dignity a few years later, probably by the 
death of the son. 

Archdale was appointed Governor of Carolina with the 
express hope that he would be able to heal the disturbances 
in South Carolina. This trouble had arisen through the 
popular ferment about the tenure of lands, the payment of 
quit-rents, the naturalization of Huguenots, and the recent 
annulment by the Proprietors of the laws of Ludwell's Par- 
liament relating to juries and the election of representatives.* 
At last Governor Smith wrote in despair to the Proprietors 
that " it was impossible to settle the country, except a Pro- 
prietor himself was sent over with full power to heal their 
grievances."' Lord Ashley, grandson of Shaftesbury, was 
first chosen for this duty, but he declined, and the Proprie- 
tors chose Archdale in his place with almost unlimited 
powers. He could sell, let, or escheat lands, appoint deputy 
governors in both provinces, make and alter laws. His 
powers were so great, in fact, that the Proprietors were care- 
ful to say his case should not be taken as a precedent for 
future governors. 

Archdale left England on his dif^cult mission in Decem- 
ber, 1694. In April, 1695, he landed at " Pasca in New 
England." From here he traveled overland to Boston, and 
seems to have come all the way south overland. He ar- 
rived in North Carolina, June 25, 1695. Here he found 
Thomas Harvey acting as Deputy Governor. He had been 
filling this ofRce since September 24, 1694,' at least, and 

' Col. Rec, I . 467, 545. 

'^ Rivers, History of South Carolina. 171. 

^ Archdale's Description of Carolina^ and his MSS. 

■• Archdale succeeded Thomas Smith as Governor-General. Lud- 
well had been made Governor-General, November 2, 1691. Smith 
was appointed Nov. 29, 1693 (S. C. Hist. Soc. Colls., I., 134). He 



58 SoutJtvni QiiaJcvr.s and >>lavcri/. 

was now established in his office by Archdale, who, along 
with his son, then passed on to South Carolina by water. 
He took up his residence in Charleston, assumed the gov- 
ernment, August 17. 1695, and on August 23, in addition to 
his other duties, was commissioned as deputy to Earl 
Craven. His administration of South Carolina was, as it 
had been formerly in North Carolina, wise, prudent and 
moderate. He found a keen spirit of hostility to the French 
refugees. They were subjected to many discriminations 
and suffered much hardship. Mr. Ash and some of the Dis- 
senters desired the French to have no more privileges than 
negroes; so sharp was the opposition that he thought 
best to summon his first Assembly from the English inhabi- 
tants only. On petition of the Commons, three years' rent 
was remitted to those who held land by grant, and four years' 
to those who held by survey without grant. Arrears of 
quit-rents w-ere to be paid in money or commodities, as was 
most convenient. The price of land was reduced from £50 
to £25 per 1,000 acres, and he was authorized to sell lands 
and grant titles to immigrants after they got to Carolina, 
which had not been the case previously. 

Archdale established a special board for deciding contests 
between white men and Indians, and in this way won the 
friendship of the latter. He was careful to keep those In- 
dians who were friendly to his Government from causing 
diplomatic trouble whh the Spaniards in Florida, and by 
several little acts of kindness won the good-wll of the latter. 
Under his quieting administration the many bickerings of 
the colonists became less harsh, and under his successor, 
March 10, 1696(97), an act for the naturalization of aliens 

was thus put over the whole province and had authority to appoint 
a Deputy Governor for North Carolina. But Ludwell seems to 
have hccu -ictinK as Governor of Nortli Carolina as late as ]\Iav 1, 
1694 {('nl. h'cc. I.. 391). Imdwell was Governor-General, 1G9193, 
and Edmund Randolph says that "one Jarvis "' was appointed 
Deputy Governor of North Carolina hy Col. Ludwell, "then Gover- 
nor of all Carolina" (S. C. Hist. Soc. Colls.. I.. 206 ; II.. 196). Was 
Alexander Lillington ^"vernor of North Carolina during any part 
of this period, as is commonly said V 



I 



John Archdale and Southern Quakerism. 59 

and for granting liberty of conscience was passed. This act 
covered the case of the Huguenot refugees, and further pro- 
vided " that all Christians which now are or hereafter may 
be in this province (Papists only excepted) shall enjoy the 
full liberty of their consciences." Archdale stood between 
the extremes in these quarrels, and no doubt had a care for 
his co-religionists at the same time, and while administer- 
ing a general military law, secured a special act, passed 
March i6, 1695(96), exempting Quakers from its provisions. 
In 1704 and 1705, when the line was sharply drawn between 
Churchmen and Dissenters, Archdale steadily and strongly 
opposed the church acts. He refused to give his sanction 
to these acts, and received thanks from the Dissenters for 
the same. Writing to Sir Nathaniel Johnson in 1705, and 
remembering the instructions from Lord Granville, perhaps, 
he reminds Johnson that he is also a Proprietor, and there- 
fore has an equal voice in affairs, and counsels him: "I 
earnestly desire thee to be a reconciling instrument of 
peace; else," he adds, with a prophetic ring to be heard 
later from one end of America to the other, " Saxons will 
goe for Pensilvania if you continue obstinate towards y°^ 
being a free people they expect in a wilderness an enlarge- 
ment not a lessening of their priviledges " (MSS.). Again, 
in his Description of Carolina, he makes an unanswerable 
plea for liberality and religious freedom: "It is stupendous 
to consider how passionate and preposterous zeal not only 
vails but stupefies, oftentimes, the rational powers; for can- 
not Dissenters kill wolves and bears, &c., as well as Church- 
men; as also fell trees and clear ground for plantations, and 
be as capable of defending the same, generally, as well as the 
other? Surely Pennsylvania can bear witness to what I 
write." 

The administration of Archdale had a soothing effect on 
the people of South Carolina. Through his skill the prov- 
ince began to increase in wealth; the disputes and quarrels 
of the day were quieted for the time, and remained so until 
the efforts of the Churchmen to set up an Establishment 
again threw the province into an uproar. 



60 Southern Quakers and ISlavery. 

Toward the close of 1696 Archdale left South Carolina 
on his return to England. He was succeeded in the chief 
command by Joseph Blake as Deputy Governor (commis- 
sion dated December 20, 1695). He carried with him the 
thanks of the House of Representatives to the Proprietors 
for sending- them such a successful governor. He again 
visited North Carolina on his way; v/as present at a Pala- 
tine's court held December 9, 1696; again confirmed the 
government of Thomas Han^ey, and in the winter, or spring, 
of 1697 traveled through the province with James Dickin- 
son, as we have seen. Here he was also highly esteemed, 
for in the address to the Proprietors by the North Carolina 
House of Burgesses, which is signed by John Porter, a man 
to become famous in the colony ten years later,- it is said 
that he w-as a man " whose greatest care it is to make peace 
and plenty flow amongst us " (February 4, 1696(97). 

Archdale left Carolina in the spring of this year and saw 
America no more. One of his daughters had married in 
North Carolina in 1688. Her husband was Emmanuel 
Lowe, who became prominent in the Cary troubles, 1705-11. 
Her family has become extinct in the State within a genera- 
tion. In 1705 Archdale was speaking of coming to Caro- 
lina again. He says that he had then, besides his daughter 
in North Carolina, a sister's son in South Carolina (Blake?), 
"a sober discreet and hopeful young man about 27: yea: 
old: . . . my wife hath also a son there who principally on 
my acc° is gou^ of y^ North." This was Thomas Cary,' 
Governor of North Carolina, 1705-07. 1708-10. He had been 
secretary of the Council of South Carolina in 1695 ; was reg- 
ister of the admiralty court in February, 1697(98) ' ; was 
receiver-general or treasurer of the province from about 
August, 1697, to August 16, 1698. He was appointed to 
this ofiRce by Archdale, but a commission was afterwards 



'It seems that Cary married the daughter of John Archdale's 
wife by hor first husband, the daughter probably being Gary's 
couKJn. 

'S. C. Hist. Soc. CoUh., I., 207. 



John Archdale and Southern Quakerism. 61 

created to inspect and audit his accounts. He died prior to 
November 21, 1718, "greatly indebted to their Lordships."^ 

Archdale was succeeded in the proprietorship on April 9, 
1709, by John Dawson, his son-in-law." His work was per- 
haps more permanent in the northern colony. Here the 
good work inaugurated by him was continued under Har- 
vey; the colonists enjoyed peace within and without, and 
their general progress was steadily upward. He had been 
sagacious, prudent and moderate. His arrival was like 
balm to this colony, long torn and bleeding from political 
dissensions and from the misrule of ignorant Proprietors 
and villainous governors. These troubles were ended by 
his coming. The colonists set themselves at once to recover 
lost vantage-ground, and seem to have entered on a period 
of prosperity and quiet wdiich had hitherto never been known 
in their troublesome history. Archdale's faith tended also 
to encourage religion and morality. The Quakers thus re- 
ceived an impetus in North Carolina which gave them the 
prestige and power needed to carry them through the strug- 
gle of the next twenty years. They now began to appear 
more frequently than formerly as holders of office in both 
the Carolinas. The Council, the courts and the Assembly 
soon showed a preponderance of Quaker influence. There 
was a material reward for being a Quaker, and Churchmen 
and others who thus found it to their interests deserted their 
own creeds to enroll themselves among Friends. They were 
thus prepared for the coming struggle with the Establish- 
ment.° 

Although the effect of the administration of Archdale was 
long felt in the Carolinas, the personal element seems to 
have disappeared with the close of the century. But his 
return to England did not mean retirement to private life. 
In 1698 he was elected to Parliament from the borough of 
Chipping Wycombe, and was the first Quaker elected to a 

' S. C. Hist. Soc. Colls., I., 193. 'Ibid., I.. 156. 

^Col. Rec, I., 708 ; Hawks, II., 364, Fox's letter, ante. 



62 l>>out]tcni Qudhxrs and Slavery. 

seat in that body. But his seat was never occupied. He 
preferred to bear testimony to the honesty of his convic- 
tions rather than enjoy the honor of personal distinction 
and advancement. The stor}^ of this pubhc testimony can 
best be told in the language of the journals of the House of 
Commons for January 3, 1698(99): 

" The House was, according to order, called over, and the 
names of such members as made default taken down, and 
their names being called over a second time, several were 
excused upon account of their being sick; and others upon 
the road coming up, and others upon account of extraordi- 
nary occasions in the country' ; and the name of John Arch- 
dale, Esq., a Burgess for the Borough of Chiping Wicomb, 
in the County of Bucks, being called over a second time, 
]\Ir. Speaker acquainted the House that Mr. Archdale had 
been with him this morning, and delivered him a letter 
sealed, which Mr. Speaker presented to the House. And 
the same was opened and read, and is as followeth, viz: 

"'London, 3rd of the nth /mo called Januar^^ 1698-9. 

Sir, — Upon the call of the House it will appear that I am 
duly chosen and returned to serve in Parliament for the 
Borough of Chipping Wycombe, in the county of Bucks, 
and therefore I request thee to acquaint the Honourable 
House of Commons the reason that I have not yet appeared; 
which is, that the Burgesses being voluntarily inclined to 
elect me, I did not oppose their inclinations, believing that 
my declarations of fidelity, etc., might in this case, as in 
others where the law requires an oath, be accepted; I am 
therefore ready to execute my trust if the House think fit to 
admit of me thereupon, whicli I do humbly submit to their 
wisdom and justice; and shall acquiesce with what they may 
be pleased to determine therein. This being all at present, 
I remain. Thy real and obliged friend, 
John Archd.xle.' " 

The case came up for settlement on the 6th of January, 
when .Xrchdale was ordered to be present. "The House 



John Archdale and Southern Quakerism. G3 

being informed that Mr. Archdale attended according to 
order, his letter to Mr. Speaker was again read, and the sev- 
eral statutes qualifying persons to come into, and sit, and 
vote in this House were read . . . and then the said Mr. 
Archdale was called in, and he came to the middle of the 
House almost to the table ; and Mr. Speaker, by direction of 
the House, asked him if he had taken the oaths, or would 
take the oaths, appointed to qualify himself to be a member 
of this House? To which he answered back, in regard to a 
principle of religion, he had not taken the oaths nor could 
take them, and then he withdrew." 

With this great public testimony to the then startling prin- 
ciple that a man's yea and nay are sufBcient and that a super- 
added oath is unchristian, John Archdale withdrew from the 
Parliament of England, and his vacated seat was soon occu- 
pied by his brother Thomas.^ 

In March, 1696(97), James and Ann Dilworth, of Phila- 
delphia, expressed their purpose to visit the South. They 
were probably accompanied by Richard Gove. In June, 
1698, they reported that in Maryland and Virginia they 
found an openness to come to meetings; people were anx- 
ious to come to the Truth and to be visited. Jonathan Tay- 
lor, an English Friend, was in Carohna in 1697 or 1698. In 
1698 William Ellis (1658-1709), of Airton, in Yorkshire, and 
Aaron Atkinson (1665-1740), of Cumberland, visited the 
South. They started about March and intended to stay 
three or four months. At Chuckatuck, " we find many poor 
dejected people that profess Truth, who for want of true care 

' Qudkerianay May. 1894. Archdale printed in London in 1707: A 
New Description ot that Fertile and Pleasant Province of Carolina, 
etc. This little book deals almost exclusively with South Carolina 
affairs and does not expressly state that he had ever visited North 
Carolina. It is hardly a description ; it is rather a memoir, ramb- 
ling, discursive, defensive, recounting his personal experience 
and work as governor, etc. About 1700 Thomas Archdale con- 
veyed all the estate of Loakes to Henry Petty, Lord Shelbourne, 
son of Sir William Petty. There are buried at the parish church of 
Wycombe : Thomas Archdale, probably the father of John, obiit 
Sept. 5. 1676 ; Matthew Archdale, obiit Dec. 10, 1685 ; Ann Arch- 
dale, obiit Oct. 25, 1719. 



04: iSuntlurn (^iialrrs and Slavery. 

in themselves, and of visiting by Friends in love and zeal, 
are grown too cold." In May he wrote that they had been 
once through \'^irginia and Carolina, " things being much 
out of order amongst Friends, and wrong minded people 
bearing sway." He spoke of being present at a yearly 
meeting. This was no doubt in Virginia. He left Atkin- 
son there.^ 

Thomas Chalkley was also in \'irginia toward the close of 
1698. accompanied by Richard Hoskins and Richard Gove.' 
He did not go to Carolina; in Accomac and Northampton 
counties, Va., they had " large meetings. ... In those parts 
we had several meetings, where we were informed Friends 
had not had any before." He visited the Middle and New 
England colonies, then traveled south. " And after we had 
had several good and open meetings in A'lrginia, we found 
ourselves clear of America," March, 1699.' 

The next traveling Friends in the South were Roger Gill 
and Thomas Story. They sailed from England in Novem- 
ber, 1698, and cast anchor in Mobjack Bay, Virginia, in 
February, 1699. Of Roger Gill we know little. He had 
professed with the Baptists in his youth, but joined Friends 
at nineteen. After traveling in the South, they went to New 
England. The yellow fever was then raging in Philadel- 
phia. Gill felt himself called to go there and administer to 
the sick. During the Yearly Meeting he prayed God to 
stay His hand, and offered his own life if God " would be 
pleased to accept " it for a sacrifice. He was impressed 
with the belief that his prayer had been heard, took the 
fever and died in a few days (1699).* 

Thomas Story was one of the most important of the An- 
glo-American Quakers. He was bom about 1662, near Car- 
lisle, in Cumberland. His parents were members of the 
Church of England. He was well educated and was de- 
signed for the law. He became a Quaker in 1691, and 
traveled in Scotland the next year. He visited America in 

'L»7e and Correspondence of William and Alice Ellis, hy James 
Backhouse. Pliila.h'lphia. 18.-)0. * B()W(icMi. II., 53. 

'■'Jvurnul, ed. 1790, 15-17, 23, 24. ■* Bowden, II., 45. 



John Archdale and Southern Quakerism. 65 

1699, as \vc have seen, and was preparing to return to 
England when William Penn invited him to remain in 
Pennsylvania and take office under that government. He 
consented, and was appointed a member of the Council of 
State, keeper of the Great Seal, master of the rolls for 
recording patents of land, one of the commissioners of prop- 
erty, and later became the first Recorder of Philadel- 
phia. He did not discontinue his ministry, but visited most 
parts of America. He returned to England in 17 14, settled 
there, and visited Holland, Germany and Ireland, being im- 
prisoned in the latter country in 1716. He died at Carlisle, 
June 21, 1742.' 

The American labors of Stor}' and Gill began in Virginia. 
"On the nth of 12th month [1698(99)] we set sail in the 
long boat for Queen's creek in York river, where we got 
with some difficulty, and were made welcome at the house 
of our friend Edward Thomas; had a meeting with the fam- 
ily, and a few of the neighborhood, who, though not of the 
society, were several of them much tendered; which was the 
first fruits of our ministry in that country, and good encour- 
agement. We went from hence to Warwick River, Martin's 
Hundred, and Bangor House, and had meetings to satisfac- 
tion. At Scimmino in York county, at the house of John 
Bates, we had a meeting appointed, where no meeting had 
been before. The people were generally tendered and hum- 
bled, and we comforted in a sense of the love and visitation 
of God towards them. . . . Next day we had a meeting at 
the house of Daniel Akehurst," in which many were hum- 
bled and tendered by the word and power of truth, and de- 

' Bowden, II., 47. 

' Akehurst was a minister of the Society. Archdale appointed him 
his deputy. March 26, 1681. Hf» was witness to a marriap^e in Isle of 
Wight County, November 9. 1692. February 8, 1692(93), the Proprie- 
tors appointed him secretary of that part of their province north and 
east of Cape Fear. His original commission is now in possession of 
the writer and is signed by John Archdale for Tliomas Archdale, 
Shaftesbury. Colleton, and Craven. I do not know how long he held 
this office. He seems to have returned to Virginia after his term of 



GO ^Southern (Junkers dud ^Slarery. 

parted in a solid frame of mind. . . . The next morning we 
went down to Thomas Gary's towards the foot of the creek. 
He had been httely convinced . . . and his brother Miles 
Cary." Then they crossed over James River and went 
to Chuckatuck. where they lodged at the house of John 
Copeland, "and upon some discourse witli our frientl, 1 
found he was one of the first of those who had their ears cut 
ofT by the Independents in New England for the testimony 
of truth, in the first publishing thereof to that rebellious 
generation : and at my request he showed us his right ear, 
yet bearing the badge of their antichristianity." ' 

" From hence we went to Derasconeck, Western Branch 
and Southern Branch, having meetings to our comfort and 
satisfaction." Then they had a meeting at Barbican, " be- 
ing the last meeting in Virginia towards Carolina. That 
night we lodged at our friend's, Nathan Newby's, and had 
some discourses with him concerning the Indians." ' 

Their first meeting in N^orth Carolina was on Perqui- 
mans River, at the house oi Francis Toms, now a member 
of the Provincial Council. This meeting was largely at- 
tended, including persons of note, although " the noises and 
elevations of some professing truth, occasioned their admir- 
ation and was hurtful to them." Toms conducted Story 
from this meeting to the ctnirt. where they met Governor 
Harvey, to whom Story presented letters of introduction 
from England. He was kindly received and hospitably en- 
tertained, and this, together with his appointment by Arch- 
dale, will lead us to think that Harvey was himself a Quaker. 
March 9, 1699, Story held another meeting at the house of 



office in Carolina expired, as the quotation from Story indicates. He 
died 8th of eleventh nioiitli, KiO'.). prohiibly in Vir^nnia, and we find 
an Ann Akeliurst tnenti(U)ed in 1703, wlio was piobiihly his widow. 
Yettiie records of Nortli Carolina meetings spoke of him and entered 
a memorial of hitn on their ]iafxes as if he w;is still a member of 
their meeting?. In The National Mayazinc. Aufjiist, I8i'2, 1 published 
his commission as secretary of North Carolina and such biographi- 
cal facts as I conld feather. 

' Story's Journal, ed. 1747. 153 155. ' H>i(i., 155-15fi. 



John Archdale and Southern QuaJcerism. 67 

Henry White, on Little River, also one at Stephen Scott's. 
This meeting " was small, but well and tender." Later they 
crossed the Sound and preached to the settlers on the south- 
ern side, at the widow Anne Wilson's; but the scene of 
Story's labors lay principally in the precinct of Perquimans, 
for the largest part of the Quakers lived in that precinct and 
in Pasquotank adjoining.' 

After preaching in Carolina, Story and Gill " set forward 
for Virginia and were at Chuckatuck, Southern Branch, 
Elizabeth's River, and had meetings. . . . After this we had 
a meeting at Pagan Creek, Lyon's Creek, and from hence 
went to Burleigh, to the house of James Johns." They 
cheered themselves on the way with " drams, sugar and nut- 
meg, we made punch in a little horn cup; and so had 
good entertainment." At the house of Johns, Story was 
exercised over the welfare of some Indian servants, and un- 
folded to them spiritual things. " After this, we had sev- 
eral meetings, and came to our friend Jane Pleasants " at 
Curies. Here he heard that her son was likely to marry 
outside of the Society. They had a meeting, and " my con- 
cern in it was, for the most part, about marriage, and the 
displeasure of God against his own people in the old world, 
and in all ages of this, against mixed marriages between 
them and the world." 

' A meeting-house, to be built "at Pasquotank with as much speed 
as can be," was provided for by the monthly meeting of May 1, 
1703 [Col. -Rec, I.. 596) ; not March 1, as Dr. Hawks states (II., 867). 
This is the oldest Quaker meeting house of which we have distinct 
record, and it places their church edifices among the very oldest in 
the colony. In 1705 it was determined to erect a meeting-house on 
the plantation of Joseph Jordan. " at the charge of Friends belong- 
ing to Pasquotank" (original record in Hawks, II.. 3J1), and in the 
next year Caleb Bundy asked the approval of the Society in regard 
to the erection of a place of worship near his residence. [Ibid.. II., 
368.) We cannot fix accurately the position of these early churches. 
Traditions still point to the sites of two Quaker meeting-houses in 
Pasquotank, the one near Weeksville, and the other about a mile 
from Symons's Creek, on the road from Nixonton to Weeksville, and 
about two miles from the former place. These houses were doubt- 
less erected during this early period. 

"Story's Journal, ed. 1747, 156-158. 



68 Southern Quakers and Stlarenj. 

From Curies, Story and Gill visited the Chickahominy 
Indians toward the upper part of the Mattapony River. " The 
town consisted of about eleven wigAvams, or houses, made 
of the bark of trees, and contained so many families: we 
were directed to the sagamor, or chief; and when we went to 
his door, he came out with a piece of cloth about his middle 
but othenvise naked, and invited us in, and being set down, 
several of his people came to look upon us. After a time of 
silence and the company increased, we asked him if they 
were all there for we desired to see as many of them together 
as we could." This caused the chief some uneasiness, for he 
" was a grave, serious and wary old man." But they won 
his confidence and spoke to them of the things of God. 
When ready to leave " we took them by the hand, one by 
one, and they seemed well pleased with our visit." 

The missionaries then went to Queen's Creek, Hickory 
Neck and York City, in York County, where the people 
" were very rude, and senseless of all good." They had 
" meetings in a good degree to satisfaction " at Pocosin in 
Warwick County, and also at Kickatan and thence into 
Maryland.' Daniel Akehurst traveled with Story over a 
part of this route. 

Unfortunately, most of the Quakers have little to say 
directly as to the growth of the Society or of the religious 
and moral condition of the people among whom they trav- 
eled ; but we may conclude from the number of places visited 
that Friends were increasing in numbers and influence. 
They seem to have suffered little at this time from the pres- 
ence of the Establishment. We find John Copeland residing 
in peace in Virginia, and probably preaching his doctrines 
without let or hindrance. The people seem to have received 
them well for the most part, and were eager for meetings. 
But Storv' gives one notable exception. At Elizabeth's 
Town he found some of them " a vcn,- rude, senseless people, 
devoid of all relish of truth, and the fear of God in general; 

'Kendall '8 .SYory. ed. 178C, 111-122: Life of Story, ed. 1747, 158- 
167. 



John ArchdalG and Southern Quakerism. (»9 

yet to the meetings many of them came; some were civil, 
others tender; but the bulk of them, airy, wanton, and scof- 
fers; sometimes rushing into the meeting and leering under 
their hats, and then again running out of the house, mocking 
at what they had heard ; both to the great disturbance of the 
few who were sober, and us who went to visit them in the 
goodness of God." ' 

With Story's visit the histor)^ of the seventeenth century 
closes. 

' Life of Story, 159. See also Hawks's North Carolina, II., 365. 



CHAPTER V. 

The Expansion ov Southern Quakerism in the 
Eighteenth Century. 

During the seventeenth centun- there was no large or 
sudden immigration of Quakers into any of the provinces 
under consideration. The Society enjoyed during that pe- 
riod a quiet and steady growth. It received some" acces- 
sions from the incoming of persons who were already 
Friends, but these were comparatively few. Its greatest 
increase came from the numerous converts to Quakerism that 
were made at home. In 1700 Quakers were the most numer- 
ous and the only organized body of Dissenters in any of these 
provinces. 

During the first generation of the eighteenth century there 
was no marked change in either of the provinces. But a 
wave of Quaker migration, southward bound, was rising 
during these years in Pennsylvania and New Jersey. This 
wave reached the Monocacy region in Maryland about 1725. 
It crossed the Potomac and struck Hopewell, in Frederick 
County, Virginia, in 1732. A monthly meeting was organ- 
ized here in 1735. About the same time another branch of 
the same wave passed from Maryland into Loudoun and 
Fairfax counties, Va. From these northern counties it 
moved southward, touched slightly Fauquier, Culpeper, 
Stafford and Orange counties; stopped in full force in Camp- 
bell and P>cdford, and to a less extent in Pittsylvania and 
Halifax; thence it moved into Surn*, Stokes, Guilford, Ala- 
mance, Chatham and Kandolph counties, N. C. : thence it 
passed into South Carolina and Cicorgia. 

It is therefore possible for us to divide the histon- of 
Southern Quakerism in tlu' eighteenth century into two 
pretty well defined iiarts: 1. The counties l>ing on and near 
the sea-coast represented the old Quaker stock, the native 



Expansion in the Eighteenth Century. 71 

element; 2. The inland counties represented the incoming 
of the later immigrants, many of them Germans or Welsh- 
men by birth or descent, who were destined to replant Quak- 
erism in the South, and without whose representatives the 
Society would be almost extinct in these States to-day. 

This southward-moving wave of Quaker migration is al- 
most identical in character, as it is in time, with the move- 
ment of the Scotch-Irish. It started from the same prov- 
ince, Pennsylvania; it moved over the same territory, and it 
has left its indelible impress on much of this territory. It 
did not have a Southern wing coming in at Charleston, as 
did the Scotch-Irish; it did not spread itself over the whole 
country; but it also stood for education, morality and reli- 
gion ; it did not bring the sword and it did not seek political 
advancement. It, too, was instrumental in the settlement oi 
the West and is still a great and growing power. 

In this chapter I shall undertake to develop the history of 
the older settlements first, and shall then treat as a separate 
element what I have ventured to call " the replanting of 
Southern Quakerism." 

I. — T/ie Expansion of the Native Element. 

One of the most distinguishing features of Friends is their 
cordial recognition of the power of the press. The Diction- 
ary of National Biography has remarked that Friends, 
admitting the use of no weapon but the pen, have made 
unstinted use of that, and a look into Joseph Smith's Cata- 
logue of Friends' Books will convince of the truth of the 
saying. So far as my own observations and experience go, 
Friends have been more careful than other denominations in 
preserving materials for their history. But their manuscript 
records are, of necessity, filled with routine matters, and the 
Society in its larger aspects is seldom considered. Further, 
the records of nearly all these meetings are imperfect; some 
have lost all their records, and none are full for the period 
prior to 1750. In this dearth of material we turn with joy 



72 Southern Quakers and Slarrrj/. 

to the journals of the " PubHc " Friends, but these have 
much that is of Httle value to the historian. These preachers, 
intent on the hie^her life, failed, for the most part, to notice 
the moral, intellectual, political and economic condition of 
the people among whom they moved. As a rule they failed 
utterly to avail themselves of their magnificent opportunities 
to gather materials for social history. The itinerary, the 
bare mention of the different meeting-houses visited, is the 
main feature of the narrative, and in some cases the only fea- 
ture; but still there is generally much in their journals of 
value. Occasionally we have a journalist like Story who 
gives a larger setting to his labors, thus affording us 
glimpses of the colonies as a whole, and whose work for 
this reason is doubly valuable. It is from these journals 
and from what we have of manuscript records that we must 
reconstruct, as carefully as we can, the history of the expan- 
sion of this native element of Quakerism in the South. 

The first traveling ministers in Virginia and Carolina, 
after the beginning of the new century, were John Richard- 
son and John Estaugh,' English Friends. They arrived in 
March, 1701, and found "great openness in these two prov- 
inces amongst the people, and a tender-hearted remnant of 
Friends scattered abroad in these wilderness countries." In 
Virginia Richardson had some experiences with a priest 
who was seeking to collect from Friends the tithe allowed 
him by law. " I was also in company with the governor of 
Virginia [Francis Nicholson] at our friend Richard John's 
house, upon the West Clififs, in Maryland, for we both 
lodged there one night, and I heard that he had been studi- 
ous in a book against Friends, called the Snake, and Friends 
greatly desired he might have the answer called the Switch, 
but knew not how to be so free with him as to offer it to 
him; I told Friends, I would endeavor to make way for it. 



' Estau^li (c. 167ri-l742) was of Duiiniow, in Essex, and later 
settled at Iladdonfifld in New Jersey. He joined Friends at seven- 
teen and traveled extensively both in Great Britain and America. 
He died in Tortola. 



E.rpansion i)i the Eighteenth Centuri/. 73 

Altho' he had seemed to be a man of few words, yet at a 
suitable interval I said to him, I had heard that he had seen 
a book called the Snake in the Grass; he confessed he had. 
I desired he would accept of the answer, and be as studious 
in it as he had been in the Snake; which he promised he 
would and took the book." ' 

During the same year John Salkeld" visited Virginia and 
North Carolina. We have few facts in regard to the jour- 
ney, but he could give a good account of the people: " There 
is a loving people in each of these places, and especially in 
Carolina, amongst many that are not yet fully in the pro- 
fession of truth." He had " divers large and good meet- 
ings," and " the Lord's blessed power did much appear to 
his glory and his people's comfort." But he warns traveling 
Friends to be on their guard, " the meetings being much 
mixed, some watching for evil, and others too ready to take 
ofifense and be stumbled." ^ 

But these were among the lesser lights of Quakerism. In 
March, 1703, came Thomas Chalkley, who was to become 
one of the most prominent of the American Quakers. He 
was born at Southwark, England, in 1675, and had been 
piously trained. His first visit to America was in 1698. 
He saw it again in 1701 : " We were about eight weeks from 
Land's End to the Capes of Virginia, had meetings twice a 
week on board, and they helped to stay our minds on our 
Maker, though our bodies were tossed to and again on the 
mighty waters." He and his family went on shore at Pa- 
tuxent River and prepared to settle in America. 

' Richardson's Journal, ed. 1783. 63-67, 144. Richardson (c. 1666- 
1753) seems to have visited Virginia and North Carolina again in 
1731, with Henry Frankland, p. 224. 

-Salkeld (1672-1739) was of Westmoreland. Some years later 
he migrated to Pennsylvania and settled at Chester. He traveled 
several times througr. most parts of America, and about 1712 re- 
visited England, and also traveled in Scotland and Ireland. Sal- 
keld was accompanied by Robert Roberts, of Philadelphia. John 
Rodman and Vincent Caldwell, both of Philadelphia, visited Mary- 
land, Virginia and Carolina in September, 1702. 

^Janney, III., 127-128. 



74 i<onHtcrn (^udkiis <iud i^hirerif. 

" After some time, I was drawn forth to visit Friends in 
Maryland, Virginia, and North Carohna, and went with the 
unity of Friends, having their certificate (according to the 
good order estabUshed among us) ; so about the 26th of the 
first month, 1703, I went thro' Maryland, and visited Friends 
in Virginia and North Carolina, to the river Pamphlico, 
where no traveling public Friends (that I ever heard of) 
were before, and we had several meetings there on each side 
of the river. . . . And on our return through North Caro- 
lina, we had several large meetings, and an open time it was; 
as also at Nansemond and Chockatuck, and several other 
places in Virginia; and when my service was over in these 
two provinces, I w-ent back to ]\Iaryland and visited meet- 
ings there, and then went home. As near as I can compute 
it. I rode about a thousand miles in this journey." ' 

This is the first indication we have of the expansion of the 
Friends of Albemarle. Up to this time they had been only 
in Pasquotank and Perquimans counties. Tliey had now 
crossed Albemarle Sound, and with the tide of population 
had drifted into the section watered by the Pamlico and its 
tributaries. Tliis is beyond doubt the beginning of the Core 
Sound and Contentnea settlements of Friends which were 
quite prominent a generation later. The Quakers were still 
practically the only religious organization in this province. 

Chalkley seems to have visited only the meetings in Nan- 
semond County and the adjoining southeastern section of 
Virginia. It was difYercnt with Thomas Story, who visited 
the colony in 1705. He had much discussion with priests 
and others; was treated witli nnicli kindness by Governor 
Nicholson; visited meetings at P>lack Creek. Curies in Hen- 
rico, Levy Neck or Pagan Creek in Isle of Wight, Chucka- 
tuck, Western j'.rancli of Nansemond. Southern Branch, 
and then passed down into North Carolina. He held a 
" large and comfortal)le " meeting in Per(|uinians Countv, 
besides others. At the house of Emmanuel Lowe he had 

' Juttrual, 38-89. 



Expansion in the Eighteenth Century. 75 

an interview, perhaps by appointment, with Thomas Cary, 
then Governor. He had much discourse with Cary " about 
matters of government, and informed him of the methods 
taken by some other governors in other governments, con- 
cerning our Friends and in favor of us against the severity 
of some laws, and found him hkewise very incHnable to 
favor us so far as in any construction he could consistent 
with his office." Dr. Hawks argues from this that Cary, the 
"artful demagogue," was "even then cajoling them into 
partizanship, which was afterwards fully developed in his 
rebellion." ' 

Story visited Pasquotank and held a meeting there. 
" Many of the country people came to it, who were generally 
sober; and the Lord opened the truths of the gospel ver>' 
clear and with authority." The next day he held a meeting 
in upper Perquimans, " which was the best and most power- 
ful meeting I had in that country." ' 

" The next day I went back into Virginia fifty miles, being 
exceeding hot weather, and no wind, nor house in the way 
to entertain us. On the 14th I was at a monthly meeting 
at Chuckatuck; which was very large, and the whole public 
service fell upon me." He attended other meetings in 
Surry, Isle of Wight, Nansemond and York counties, and at 
Hicquotan, now Hampton, in Elizabeth City County. His 
record shows that the Virginia meetings were still clinging 
closely to the tidewater section. 

There were at this time three monthly meetings in Vir- 
ginia: at Chuckatuck, York, and Curies. The Chuckatuck 
monthly meeting was soon divided into two, and one was 
then held at the meeting-house called Buffkins, on the east 
side of Nansemond River.' The meetings in this section 



' History of North Carolina, II., 366. = Life of Story. 375-378. 

^ These are not the earliest houses erected in Virginia, but as 
they are the earliest of which the record has survived, it may be of 
interest to give a fevt^ items. The Buffkius meeting house, on the 
South Bi-anch of Nansemond River, vras 20x20 feet; the inside 
was ceiled and the floor laid with planks, and was fitted with 
forms and seats. It was on Leavin Buffkin's plantation, hence 



7G i^oiitlwni (Jnakvr.s and Slavery. 

formed a quarterly meeting that came to be known later as 
the Lower Quarter. At first it is referred to under the 
name of the meeting-house where it was held for the time. 

The records of the monthly meeting at Curies, in Hen- 
rico County, begin witli 1699. It is probable that the meet- 
ing was settled not later than 1692 (see post, p. 147). The 
Quakers of Henrico had obtained recognition under the 
Toleration Act as early as 1692. We have contemporary 
authority to show that they were in this county as early as 
1678, and that they had suffered persecution there. Their 
meetings were held at first in the house of William Porter. 
This was continued for a number of years. In 1699 we find 
the following parties subscribed tobacco to build a meeting- 
house at Curies: James Pleasants, 500 pounds; James How- 
ard. 500 and three days' work; Henr\^ Watkins, Sr.. 500; 
Edward Hughes, 500; Wm. Porter, Jr., 300; John Crew, 
400; John Robinson, 250; Ephm. Gartrite, 150; Wm. Lead. 
150: Robert Boyes, 20 pounds and three days' work; Samuel 
Gartrite. 10; John Pleasants, 55; Joseph Pleasants, 50; Nich. 
Hutchins, 40; Edward Mosby, 25; Joseph Parsons, 15; 
Henry Watkins, Jr., 15; Benj. Woodson, 5; John Woodson. 
50. 

This monthly meeting seems to have been migratory like 
the others. Within the next few years we find various par- 
ticular meetings attached to it: Merchant's Hope in Henrico; 
Black Creek in New Kent; one at James Howard's, which 

the name. It cost 3.868 pounds of tobacco. The principal contrib- 
utors were: Robert Jordan, 580 pounds of tobacco; John Mardali, 
550 pounds: Ben Small. 520; Joliu Porter. 500; Nathan Newbv. 
5(10; John HoUowell. 350; Reid Hopkins, 350; Nath. Small, 250; 
Elizabeth Maid, 100 ; Moses Hall, 350. Other members gave " uales 
of all sorts,-' besides tobacco. 

Another house was built on the Western Branch of Nansemond 
in 170'.'. It was 20x25 feet, was lilted with benches and cost 3 000 
pounds of tobacco. Francis Bridle jj;ave nails. This was an im- 
portant item and was deemed wortliy of special mention. The 
coiiti ibulors of tobacco were : Isaac Rickes, Sr.. 400 pounds ; Wm. 
St;olt. Sr.. 400; Jamt-s Deiison. 400; Jno. Deuson, 300; Abraham 
Rickes. lOn : Jno. liickcs, KO : Robert Rickes, 100 ; Jno. Sikes, 150 ; 
Thomas Hainton, 20U ; Francis Denson, 500. 



Expansion in the Eighteenth Century. 11 

was also called Old Man's Neck; and one held in the woods 
near Herring Creek. In 1722 these uncertain names give 
place to Curies, Wainoak, Black Creek, and White Oak 
Swamp, or Swamp. The last was then a new meeting. We 
also find a meeting at this time at Cedar Creek in Hanover, 
and a new one at "Appomattox at the widow Buller's," 
which seems to have been in Prince George County. In 
1722 Burleigh also belonged to this monthly meeting. The 
names of Friends in this monthly meeting indicate that they 
came from the more eastern meetings and that they received 
little increase from the immigrants who came into the Hope- 
well section. We find here such names as Pleasants, How- 
ard, Woodson, Watkins, Porter, Ellyson, Jordan, Binford, 
Cate, Hunicut, West, Johnson, Clark, Maddox, Crew, 
Goode, Stith, Janet, Fleming, Lankford, Thomas, Atkinson, 
Randolph, Lead (Lad, Ladd), Bates, Magehe, Elmore, Scott, 
Wilmore, Stanley, Mayo, Holmes, Harris, Massie, Lane, 7-^'* 
Munford, Saunders, Peebles, Cheadle, Wooddy, Simmons. 
Sebrell. Add to this list a few other names that are found 
more frequently in the eastern counties: Rickes, Small, New- 
by, Denson, Nixon, Hubbard, and we have representatives 
of a majority of Quaker families in eastern Virginia. 

During the first quarter of the eighteenth century there 
had been no material expansion of the North Carolina 
Yearly Meeting. There was then one quarterly meeting, 
with three monthly and perhaps five or six meetings for 
worship. Of the number of members we have no means for 
determining. The North Carolina meetings, however, ex- 
erted relatively a much wider influence, and the evidence is 
that the Carolinians were less tractable. The Carolinians 
had from time to time received considerable additions of 
strength from the Virginia meetings. To a certain extent 
these Carolina meetings were a continuation of, we may say 
an overflow from, the meetings in Virginia. This view is 
confirmed in part by the family names of these early Caro- 
lina Friends: Elliott, Nicholson, White, Newby, Morris, 
Nixon, Scott, Saint, Parker, Toms, Bundy, Jordan, Symons. 
Pritchett. 



78 SouUk rii (^)u(il:( rs and Slavery. 

John Fothergill visited both provinces in 1707, and says 
of the trip: " \Vc got over the great bay of Chesapeak, so 
til rough the lower part of Virginia and into North CaroHna, 
and had many strengthening and comfortable meetings in 
those parts, through extendings of the love and power of 
God towards a well disposed people, both professors of 
Truth, and some others; among whom we had some good 
service." 

After the departure of Fothergill there is a break of seven 
years in the history of Southern Quakerism.' It will be 
noticed also that little has been said about the meetings in 
Charleston. This is because we have little to say. They 
were seldom visited by the journalists; their local records 
are scanty, and the State historians know next to nothing of 
the Quakers and their work. In 171 3 Chalkley went to 
Charleston from Philadelphia by sea. So far as we know 
he was the first Friend to take this trip, and his account is 
the first we have of South Carolina Friends since the days of 
Governor Archdale. It is very noteworthy. " We were 
about a month at sea; and when it pleased God that we 
arrived at Charlestown, in South Carolina, we had a meet- 
ing there, and divers others afterwards. Tliere are but few 
Friends in this province, yet I had several meetings in the 
country. The people were generally loving, and received 
me kindly . . . and there was openness in the people 
in several places. I was several times to visit the gov- 
ernor [Charles Craven] who was courteous and civil to me. 
He said I ' deserved encouragement,' and spoke to several 
to be generous, and contribute to my assistance. He meant 
an outward maintenance; for he would have me encouraged 
to stay among them . . . The longer I staid there, the larger 
our meetings were." ' 

This entry furnishes a striking contrast to the reception 

' Esther Champion id. 1714) came about 1710; Daniel Gould (c. 
1625-1710*. and J.matlian Tyler {c. 1CG9-1717). also visited Viru^inia 
and (."aroliiia. hut we have no particulars. — Pjc/v/ Promoted, II. 

'JovrnaLii\,m. 



Expansion, in the Eighteenth Century. 79 

which Friends had been accustomed to meet in other parts. 
We can perhaps explain the difference as due in part to the 
fact that Friends were few there and were regarded with a 
certain degree of curiosity. There had been sharp ecclesi- 
astical disputes in South Carolina, as we shall see when we 
come to treat of the relations of Quakerism and the Estab- 
lished Church. It was due in part, no doubt, to the personal 
equation of Governor Craven, who was a man of personal 
courage, upright character, and devotion to the best interests 
of the province; to the natural kindness and hospitality of 
the people; perhaps in part to the Huguenots, who knew the 
evils of religious intolerance ; and to a certain extent, doubt- 
less, to the desire to hear a purer gospel than was furnished 
by many of the professional guides in affairs spiritual. Un- 
der these conditions we can but wonder that so few Friends 
ever visited this promising field. It could not have been 
because of the dilBculties of the way, for natural obstacles 
have never impeded Quakers when the spirit led. Or did 
they act on the principle that those who welcomed all Chris- 
tians were more nearly Christ's? 

Traveling Friends were probably kept out of North Caro- 
lina by the civil troubles there, 1707-11. In February, 1714, 
Thomas Wilson and James Dickinson landed on Rappa- 
hannock River, Virginia. Wilson had visited America once 
before and Dickinson twice. They went on shore at Queen 
Anne's Town. They passed over York River and then 
" took our saddles, bags and great coats upon our shoul- 
ders and traveled several miles." They went on towards 
Carolina and "had many good meetings, both among 
Friends and others." Truth was manifested, and the gospel 
of life and salvation freely declared. In Carolina " we found 
a hopeful stock of young people whom the Lord was quali- 
fying for his service; and they received the testimony of 
Truth with gladness ; we also met with several who had been 
convinced when we labored in these parts before, and it was 
a great comfort to us to find them walking in the Truth." 
On their return they held meetings in Nansemond; 



<S0 ^<ollt^lt■nl (Jiitikcrs <iii(l i^ldrcrj/. 

passed up James River; visited Friends in York County, and 
traveled in Kent, " where we had labored in the work of the 
ministry twenty tliree years before: several were then con- 
vinced, and a meeting settled from that time." They trav- 
eled next into Westmoreland, where several were convinced 
and " the testimony of Truth exhalted over all." ' 

Benjamin Holme (1682-1749) was in both provinces in 
1 71 7. He visited both yearly meeting's; reports disputes 
with priests, and an effort on the part of some to revive the 
anti-Quaker laws of 1663. But the general conditions were 
good, for persons out of Society desired meetings; a new 
meeting-house had been built in New Kent, and there were 
many meetings there.' 

John Fothergill arrived in York River in July, 1721, with 
Lawrence King of Yorkshire, on a second visit to the meet- 
ings in \'irginia and Carolina. They spent the next three 
months in traveling through these provinces, and seem to 
have visited most of the meetings. Fothergill gives us a 
very minute account of their journey in the form of notes. 
These notes may be taken as a fair sample of the average 
journal, and indicate the sort of materials, the dry skeletons 
of itineraries, clothed with little flesh, with which the his- 
torian of Quakerism has to contend so often. 

In North Carolina he first held meetings in Perquimans 
County, " to which many sober people came," and in Pas- 
quotank, "whither came many Friends; and we had an edi- 
fying season together, through the abounding of gospel life 
and wisdom "; at a meeting on the other side of Pasquotank 
"some hundreds of people were gathered; the meeting was 
held under the shade of a large tree, it being extremely hot. 
. . . We came to Little river meeting again, which was very 
large of Friends and others." And at the lower meeting- 
house on Perquimans River " tlie meeting was very large, 
and verv solid and edifying. We took leave of most of 



' Dickinson's Jo7<?-/(a/, in Fi-u'iids'' Lihrari/. XII.. 403-405; AVilson's 
Juurnal. 48. 49. 56. London, 17S4. 
' Epistles and Works, 23-27. 



Expansion in the Eighteenth Century. 81 

the Friends of Carolina here, in a sense of the love and ten- 
dering power of truth, and in much nearness to one an- 
other." They had been less than a month in Carolina, but 
it seems visited most of the Friends' meetings in Perqui- 
mans and Pasquotank. It does not appear that they went 
outside of these two counties. In Virginia they visited 
most of the meetings in Nansemond, Southampton, Surry 
and Henrico. In August " we came down to a French 
settlement called Manikin town, and on the first of the 
seventh month [September], we had a meeting there; to 
which divers of the French people, with others, came; and 
the Lord was graciously mindful of us." They passed over 
Pamunkey River, " where few or no Friends had ever been, 
or had a meeting before." Then they seemed to have turned 
west; crossed the James and Appomattox, and, after spend- 
ing most of September visiting the meetings in the eastern 
and southeastern part of the colony and attending the 
Yearly Meeting at Chuckatuck, passed north by land into 
Maryland. In November they visited the meetings on the 
Eastern Shore of Virginia, where they " were much afflicted 
in the sense of the prevailing of an earthly spirit." 

To the Yearly Meeting of London Fothergill could say of 
his work in the South that they had " many large and open 
meetings, both among Friends and others. ... In both 
these provinces we found great willingness in many people 
to hear the truth declared, divers of whom appeared very 
loving and tenderly affected. There seemed to be a com- 
fortable opening among the youth . . . and rather a growth 
among some of the elder, in a religious care. . . . Divine 
mercy still reaches freely to them, and in some places there 
is an increase in righteousness, and truth is in good esteem; 
but in others the love and friendship of the world occasion 
a decay." ^ All the regular meetings mentioned here are in 
southeastern Virginia. 

About 1722 North Carolina was visited by Susanna Mor- 

' Journal, in Friends' Library. XIII., 365, 378-382, 400. 



82 tSoutlurn (Quakers and tSlavcry. 

ris (1682-1755) and Ann Roberts (1677-1750). There is 
little of interest in the visit, save that in attempting- to cross 
Chesapeake Bay they encountered a storm and were driven 
to sea. They finally got into Currituck Inlet, and from 
thence readied the Quaker settlements in eastern North 
Carolina.' 

Rarely do these missionaries think to give us anything in 
their journals that concerns directly the expansion of the 
Society. But we have some accounts of this character from 
Samuel Bownas (1676- 1753), a Friend of Westmoreland, 
who had come out on his second visit to America in 1727. 
He was an unusually close observer. He had visited Vir- 
ginia and North Carolina in 1706, "and had good satisfac- 
tion" in his meetings. In 1727 he landed at Hampton, 
\^a. He visited most of the meetings in Virginia, was at 
various places in York, Charles City. Henrico and Hanover 
counties, which had not been mentioned so prominently 
before, " and had fine meetings, people being ready to at- 
tend them." His journal indicates that the Society was be- 
coming stronger in the upper section. He was twice in 
Carolina and reports successful meeting's, particularly in Pas- 
quotank, ." for the inhabitants mostly came to meetings there 
when they expected a preacher, and at other times pretty 
much." He was twice amongf the lower Virginia meetings. 
The progress of American Friends, as seen in his travels, 
was very encouraging. He reports that the Society was 
steadily increasing in numbers and importance. Many of 
the old meeting-houses had been enlarged to two, three or 
even four times their original capacity, new ones had been 
built, and private liouscs were no longer adequate for their 
needs. Within the last twenty-two or twenty-three years 
fifty-six new meeting-houses had been erected in America, of 
which nine were in \'irginia and three in Nortli Carolina. 

Bownas is also tiie one to give us the next account we 
have of South Carolina Friends. While in Virginia he 

' Morris. Journal, in I'nends' Mii^cellaiui . I.. l4l-lol. 



Expansion in the Eighteenth Century. S3 

" met a friend of London, his name was Joshua Fielding, 
who had visited the island, and South Carolina, and had 
traveled by land to North Carolina, about five hundred 
miles, in about three weeks, mostly alone, which was a diffi- 
cult and hazardous attempt: Some thought it too great an 
undertaking and seemed to blame him for it, but he got 
safe through, tho' he had no provision but what he carried 
with him, and met with but four or five houses or planta- 
tions in all that five hundred miles travel, which obliged him 
to lodge in the woods frequently; but having a small pocket 
compass, that was his guide, when the sun and stars were 
hid from him. But I have since heard, that some others 
have since traveled over this same ground, (plantations and 
settlements being now placed at proper distances) with less 
hardship, viz. they have a road marked out by gov- 
ernment, and now they may accomplish this journey without 
so frequently lying in the woods, as when this friend came 
from thence." 

This seems to have been the first time that province had 
been visited since Chalkley left it. Overland communica- 
tion with North Carolina was more frequent from this time, 
for the intervening country began to be settled; but it was 
not until about 1770 that organic connection with the North 
Carolina Yearly Meeting began. 

John Fothergill visited most of the Virginia and North 
Carolina meetings again in 1736. He was the first to pass 
from the older meetings in lower Virginia to the new ones 
in Frederick and Loudoun counties. Between his depart- 
ure and the middle of the century there were a number of 
traveling Friends in these colonies, but their journals are 
little more than bare itineraries. Thomas Chalkley was 
there in 1738 and had some good meetings. Jane Hoskins, 
an English Friend, had traveled in Virginia in 1726 with 
Abagail Bowles, of Ireland. In 1744 she "had a certificate 
to go a second time to Maryland, Virginia, and Carolina, in 
company with Margaret Churchman; concerning which 
visit I could say much, but it may suffice to remark that it 



84 Southern Quolrrs and Slavery. 

appeared to me to be a time of gathering, and great open- 
ness among people of various ranks. They followed us 
from meeting to meeting, treating us with respect, and the 
marks of real love and affection." ' 

John Woolman made his first visit south in 1746. We 
shall hear more of his work in connection with slavery. He 
visited most of the meetings in the colony, but " our exer- 
cise in general was more painful in these old settlements, 
than it had been among the back inhabitants." In Perqui- 
mans County, N. C, they " had several meetings, which were 
large; and found some openness in those parts, and a hope- 
ful appearance amongst the )^oung people. ... In our jour- 
neying to and fro, we found some honest hearted Friends 
who appeared to be concerned for the cause of Truth among 
a backsliding people." ' 

It appears that the native element in Virginia had reached 
its greatest expansion by the middle of the eighteenth cen- 
tury, or even a few years earlier. From that time it began 
to decay. The scepter passed from the descendants of the 
converts of Edmundson and Fox to those of the companions 
of Penn. The same course of development, the same evolu- 
tion westward, w^ith the allowance of a generation more in 
time, was to go on in North Carolina. By the Revolution 
the balance of power had passed in that State also from the 
eastern meetings to the western, from the native to the im- 
migrant element. That struggle for superiority between the 
eastern and western halves of these States, a struggle in 
economic, social and political life, which was founded on 
race differences and has been and is still a source of consid- 
erable bitterness, particularly in North Carolina, has also 
made itself felt in the Society of Friends. 

In Virginia the native element attained the most of its 
growth at an early period. We have seen that it was first 
planted in the region bordering on the lower James. Be- 



* Journal, in Friends' Librari/, I., 470. 471. 
^Journal, London, 1824, 33-35. 



Expansion in the Eighteenth Century. 85 

fore the death of Fox in 1691 there were Quakers in Nor- 
folk, Nansemond, Southampton, Isle of Wight, Prince 
George, Surry, Charles City, York, Warwick and Henrico 
counties; perhaps in others. It became well rooted, and pow- 
erful. It is a generation before we hear of a further expan- 
sion. In 1 72 1 there was a meeting at Cedar Creek in Han- 
over County. This became a monthly meeting later and in- 
cluded the particular meetings at Cedar Creek, Genito and 
Caroline, and perhaps others. The native element does not 
seem to have established any other meetings in Virginia, 
for while the monthly meetings of South River and Goose 
Creek belonged to Virginia Yearly Meeting and had some 
members from the older meetings in eastern Virginia, they 
lay directly in the line of southward migration and drew 
most of their strength from meetings to the northward. 

As the meetings in eastern Virginia are the oldest under 
consideration, so they are the first to decline. Quakers 
seem to have disappeared from Norfolk County before 1700. 
They had no doubt " gone West." That migration, which 
was to assume such gigantic proportions a century and a 
half later, had already begun. In September and October, 
1736, John Fothergill was on the Eastern Shore of Vir- 
ginia. He was in company with Edward Mifflin, and came 
down from the Eastern Shore of Maryland to Paul Crip- 
pin's, " a Friend near Muddy creek, where formerly a meet- 
ing had been settled; but by gradually mixing with the 
spirit of the world, and so into marriages with others out of 
the way of truth, the elders being dead, the youth turned 
their backs on truth, and the meeting was quite dropped. I 
had no freedom to appoint a meeting there, and so set out 
the next day towards Neswaddacks [Nassawadox] where 
notice had been given of our intention to have a meeting 
the next day, which was the first of the week. The meeting 
was held in the meeting house where formerly there had 
been a pretty number of Friends, but now they are nearly 
gone, through the love of the world, with its enjoyments and 
liberties ; so that a meeting is hardly kept there ; but a pretty 



86 South erii Qimkers and Slavery. 

many of the neiglibors gathered, and we had a meeting 
which was comfortable to me, in my faithfulness to the 
Lord; though they seemed to have little sense of God, or 
the operation of truth; for indeed a cloud of carnal indifTer- 
ency appeared to me to have overspread almost all that part 
of the country in an uncommon manner.'' 

This is the first instance we have of the decadence of 
Southern Friends. From this time the Eastern Shore of 
Virginia disappears from their records. Daniel Stanton 
visited the meetings in eastern Virginia about 1761 and 
gives us further information of the same character. Of the 
meeting at Chuckatuck he remarks: "I was informed [this] 
had been one of the largest in Virginia, but is now reduced 
to two or three families; things were at a low ebb among 
them." Another meeting was somewhat open " and at- 
tended by several who did not profess with Friends." The 
meetings at Surry and Burleigh were also attended mostly 
by people who were not Friends. There was a " large 
meeting at the burial of an ancient Friend near Wainoak ; it 
vvas held in an orchard, was an awful solid time, and of 
brokenness of heart among the people." At Curies there 
was a large meeting, " though not many Friends." ' From 
these reports it is clear that there was a decided decrease in 
the strength of the older \"irginia meetings. It will be 
noticed also that most of the meetings held are made up of 
persons other than Friends. This is also evident from the 
journal of Griffith (171 3-1 776), whose visit occurred in 1765. 

When Quakerism was thus expanding toward the west in 
Virginia, a similar but independent movement was going on 
in North Carolina toward the south. The first Quaker 
coimties of North Carolina were Perquimans and Pascjuo- 
tank.' Here it was planted by Edmundson and Fox in 

* Journal, in Friendn^ Library. XII.. 168-172. 

• Hut there were no Quakers in Caimlen, which formed the eastern 
h:ilf of Pas(iuotank until 1777 ; nor in Currituck, wliicli lies east of 
Camden ; nor have they ever been numerous in Chowan, the county 
just west of Perquimans. 



Expansion in the Eighteenth Century. 87 

1672. Migrations from these orig-inal seats of the faith 
began as early as 1703. The movement crossed Albemarle 
Sound and went south. By the middle of the century there 
were Quakers in Hyde, Beaufort, Craven, Carteret, Jones, 
Bladen and Lenoir counties. They probably had meetings 
for worship in all of these counties. 

In Carteret County, Core Sound Monthly Meeting was 
set up in 1733. It was probably the oldest in the section 
and its records have been presei*ved. In 1747 Quakers in 
Carteret were strong enough to send one of their number to 
the Assembly. But in 1771 Core Sound Monthly Meeting 
was small, for it seems that most of its members had moved 
farther into the interior of the State. At the end of the last 
century the principal families of Quakers in the meeting bore 
the names of Stanton, Williams, Harris, Brown, Howard, 
Mace, Thomas, Davis, Arnold, Hollowell, Horn, Overman, 
Dew, Bogue, Bishop, Bundy, Borden, Parker. Chadwick, 
Hellen, Scott, Physioc, and Cartright.^ 

In 1748 we find mention of a monthly meeting on Falling 
Creek, then in Dobbs, now in Lenoir County.^ This monthly 
meeting was probably not far from the present town of Kins- 
ton, and continued here until January 6, 1772, when it was 
the judgment of Friends that, since most of the Friends about 
the meeting-house on Lower Falling' Creek had died or had 
moved away, the monthly meeting should be held at Rich- 
ard Coxe's, near Upper Falling Creek. In July, 1772, it 
was said that Friends had settled on several branches of 
Contentnea Creek, and as they were distant from meeting, it 
was agreed to put a first day's meeting at Arthur Bryant's, 
and "at a monthly meeting held at Great Contentney, the 
1 2th of the 9th mo., 1772," it was also agreed that the 

' Stephen F. Miller, in his Recollections of Newbern Fifty Years 
Ago, notes the presence of one Quaker family there in 1820. 

^In 1746 there are indications that there was then a monthly 
meeting at Bath, but there are no records. It is probable that this 
was the same as the Core Sound Monthly Meeting and that it got 
this variant name from the place where it was held for the time, 
after the Virginia fashion. 



88 Southern Quakers and Slavery. 

monthly meeting should be transferred to Arthur Bryant's. 
From this time the Falling Creek Monthly Meeting dis- 
appears and Great Contentnea takes its place. It was at 
the time of its organization farther from the sea-coast than 
any other monthly meeting in North Carolina. It was 
known later as Contentnea Monthly Meeting. We find 
among its members in the eighteenth century the following 
names: Beeman, Overman, Bogue, Hollowell, Cox, Pike, 
Pearson, Hall, ^^layo, Wooten, Edgerton, Arnold, Copeland. 
Bundy, Morris, Doudna, and Outland. From these names 
we are led to infer that connection with the meetings in 
Carteret County to the east and Northampton County on 
the north was close. 

There are still to be considered in this connection the two 
monthly meetings in Northampton County, Rich Square 
and Jack Swamp, which are, strictly speaking, to be classed 
somewhat between the tsvo divisions we have made and rep- 
resent a division of their own. This settlement began about 
1750. It seems that the meeting for worship was set up in 
1753, and the monthly meeting was settled in 1760 by Elast- 
em Quarterly ^Meeting for Friends in Northampton, Hert- 
ford and Edgecombe counties. The meeting-house was 
finished in 1760, and, in accordance with the law of the 
province, was registered. The main strength of the monthly 
meeting lay in the community about Rich Square, but there 
were Friends in Hertford County, and it seems that regular 
meetings were held, but it does not appear that a meeting- 
house was ever built there. In Edgecombe County regular 
meetings were held as early as 1768, but these also were in 
private houses. We are certain that a considerable number 
of I'Vicnds' families lived there. In 1775 a meeting-house 
was built at Jack Swam]), which was then becoming a con- 
siderable settlement and which was cvolvcfl into a monthly 
meeting in 1794. Rich Square Monthly Meeting had 
grown strong enough in 1773 to ask for a quarterly meeting. 
but the request has never l)een granted. This Tiieeting was 
large in extent; Tar River Friends were transferred to 



Expansion in the Eighteenth Century. 89 

Contentnea Monthly Meeting in 1782, and Fishing Creek was 
made the dividing line. A list of those thus transferred, and 
who lived therefore on the south side of Fishing Creek and in 
Edgecombe County, has been preserved. It contains fami- 
lies by the name of White, Thomas, Vick, Wilson, Watkins, 
Horn, Denson, Rush, and Westra. Many of the names re- 
main in the section, but their form of belief has changed. 
In Hertford County were found Josiah Brown and John 
Copeland; in Bertie lived Joseph Sanders and Thomas 
Howel; and Joshua Fletcher lived in Halifax. These were 
all members of Rich Square Monthly Meeting. In North- 
ampton County were found other members of the same 
meeting, the families of Page, Dougherty, Hall, Copeland, 
Peelle, Gray, Ross, Horn, Pitman, Knox, Hollowell, Brown, 
Griffin, Elliott, Baughm, Chapel, Brittain, Richardson, 
Farmer, White, Parker, Davis, Bryant, Lancaster, Newsom, 
Beeman, RatclifT, Jordan, Outland, Lawrence, Collier, Pur- 
vis, Judkins, Blanchard, Denson, Pike, Crew, and Binford. 
To Jack Swamp Monthly Meeting belonged the Pattisons, 
Merrimons (or Merimoon), Binfords, Halls, Taylors. 

Whence came these Friends in Northampton, Edgecombe, 
Hertford, Bertie and Halifax counties? They came mostly 
from Virginia, and present a parallel to that larger mass of 
Quaker migration whose rise in Pennsylvania and south- 
ward movement to Georgia we are soon to trace. As we 
have seen, there was a large settlement of Friends in south- 
eastern Virginia in the eighteenth century, and the Quakers 
in northeastern North Carolina were at first but a continua- 
tion of the Virginia Quakers. The natural increase drove 
them southward to seek new homes. This is the beginning nl-'^! 

of the settlement. They came mostly from Isle of Wight, Cyijt^J^^' 
Surry, Prince George and Henrico counties, Va. A few 
reinforcements came from Perquimans and Pasquotank 
counties in North Carolina. Many of these settlers, like 
those who were coming into central North Carolina at the 
same time, made the Rich Square Meeting a basis for far- 
ther progress, and from this pushed out across Roanoke 



IK^ SoKthvni QuaJxcrs and Slavery. 

River to the meeting's in Dobbs County and even to South 
Carolina. 

Perhaps we can illustrate the expansion of Quaker- 
ism in eastern Virginia and eastern North Carolina in no 
better way than by quoting the journal of William Reckitt, 
who visited these meetings in 1756-57. He says of the 
meetings in Virginia: "I visited all the little handfuls scat- 
tered up and down in these parts, and often had service in 
families. I met with Samuel Spavold, who likewise was 
much engaged in the service of truth. His labor of love in 
the work of the gospel was indeed great in this part of the 
world; those of other societies being much reached by his 
ministr}^" 

Reckitt then set forward to North Carolina; held meet- 
ings at Piney Woods, Wells, Old Neck, and Little River, 
all in Perquimans County; lodged with Thomas Nicholson, 
the author; probably did not go into Pasquotank County, 
but turned to the west, accompanied by Joshua Fletcher and 
Francis Nixon. " I then set forward towards a wilderness 
country, where the inhabitants were very thin. . . . Our 
first meeting after we left Perquimans was at John Coupe- 
land's. . . . There were but few friends, but people of other 
societies came in, who had notice; amongst whom was an 
officer of the army . . ." The first established meeting 
they reached was at Fort River (Roanoke?), "where a meet- 
ing liad been recently settled, of such as had been con- 
vinced." They then came to Henry Horn's in Edgecombe 
County, who had been convinced from among the Baptists, 
for the inhabitants of this section belonged principally to 
that faith ; then they came to a small meeting at Neuse in 
Wayne County, and then ninety miles to the meeting at Core 
Sound. The destination of Reckitt was to the Friends in 
South Carolina. " The first meeting we had after we left 
Core sound, was at Permcanus Hauton's who gave us an in- 
vitation to liis house, and sent to give notice to his neigh- 
bors, thougli some lived several miles distant. We got to 
his house about the time the meeting was appointed, wliere 



Expansion in the FAghteenth Century. 91 

we found seats placed, and every thing in such convenient 
order for a meeting, as I thought I had seldom seen. His 
rooms being little, he had placed seats in his court yard, and 
under the windows, that I believe all could sit and hear 
without the least troubling one another; and indeed I 
thought his labor and good inclination were blessed, for a 
solid time it was, and I found openness to declare the truth 
amongst them. . . . We staid one night at Wilmington, the 
capital town in North Carolina; but it being their general 
court time and the privateers having brought in prizes, the 
people's minds were in great commotions, so that I could 
find no room nor freedom to have a meeting, though several 
called Quakers lived there, but held no meeting, except when 
strangers came." They crossed a branch of Cape Fear 
River and then went to Carver's Creek. " Here was a small 
gathering of Friends. We staid their first day meeting over, 
and then went to Dan's [Dunn's] Creek, where we found 
another gathering of such as call themselves Friends, but 
had been much hurt, and scattered in their minds from the 
true shepherd, by an enemy that had sown tares." ' 

As a part of these coast settlements, coming from the 
seeds of Quakerism planted in South Carolina in the sev- 
enteenth century, we must count two of the older meetings 
in that province. These were the meetings in Charleston 
and Edisto. We have seen that Chalkley visited Charleston 
in 1713. We find no further visits from traveling Friends 
for forty years. In 1753 Mary Peisley and Catherine Pey- 
ton, afterwards Phillips, landed at Charleston. They visited 
most of the meetings in the South, and both kept journals of 
their travels. They visited all the Quakers in the place, and 
found that few kept to plainness of language; discipline was 
lax and they had to revive it. The city had become a place 
of refuge for the disjointed members of Society, " where 
they may walk in the sight of their own eyes, and the imagi- 
nation of their own hearts, without being accountable to 

^Journal. Phila., 1783, 63-83. 



92 Soutlicni Quakers and Slavery. 

any for their conduct and vet be called by the name of 
Quaker." ' 

Samuel Fothergill was the next Friend to visit South 
Carolina, and his account agrees with the former report. He 
writes from Charleston, February 13, 1755: "Since I wrote 
you from Waynoak [Va.] I have visited all the residue of 
Virginia and North Carolina, and last night arrived here, 
and have had a meeting here this day, amongst a poor mis- 
erable handful of professors, and believe I must visit all their 
families before I can easily leave this place. I expect to be 
in Georgia, 150 miles south of this place, sometime next 
week, and then return northwards, 800 miles, upon a line, 
without much stop, except seven meetings which I left as I 
came southwards. 

" On the 2d instant, after a ride of fifty miles, we were 
obliged to lie in the woods all night. 

" I have this day had a large, good meeting, to my sat- 
isfaction; but the meeting house being small was incon- 
venient. Most of the principal inhabitants attended, and I 
expect the use of the Baptist meeting house on first day 
evening, to take leave of the inhabitants of this place, who 
have given general instances of their regard. 

" George Whitfield passed through this town a few days 
ago, to Georgia, having travelled very hard from Philadel- 
phia, to get to his flock before we came amongst them. 

" The state of the church is generally low, and exceed- 
ingly so in this place; there is very little of the form, and 
much less of the power, of truth amongst them. My heart 
has been bowed into strong concern, and close labor for and 
with them, and hope for some little reviving of secret care 
in particular; but alas, many seem awakened for a time, and 
sink afresh into lukewarmness." In the same letter he 
says: "I have now been to the extent of my visit south- 
ward, being 120 miles further than any Friend hath trav- 
elled on religious account, and am setting my face north- 



' Life of Mnrv Neale, formerly Mary Peisley, 1860 ; Memoirs of 

Catherine PliillipH. 1797, C3-101. 



Expansion in tJie Eighteenth Century. 93 

ward. I propose another public meeting in this place to- 
morrow, and then to leave." He was also invited to visit 
the Sea Islands, and expected to do it, but " found a prohibi- 
tion." These people seemed " desirous the testimony should 
be exalted by others, but won't lend a hand. . . . When we 
left Charleston we had near 450 miles to ride to the next 
settlement of Friends, through a country little inhabited, 
and in which accommodations were scarce enough, though 
we made shift to get into some cabin or other at nights, but 
had not my clothes ofif for several nights successively, or 
any things at times to lie down upon but a bear skin or 
boards." ' 

Reckitt was also in Charleston in 1757. " We found but 
few steady Friends, yet we had some good opportunities to- 
gether." The Charleston meeting dates, as we have already 
learned, from 1680. It was established by London Yearly 
Meeting and Charleston Friends considered themselves 
under the jurisdiction of no Yearly Meeting save London; 
they retained their connection with that and were bound by 
its principles and testimonies. They corresponded with Lon- 
don and Philadelphia, and many of the Friends there kept 
their membership in the old meetings. They were few in 
numbers, and for some t\venty years prior to 1718 no settled 
meeting for business was held. In that year what was prac- 
tically a monthly meeting was set up in Charleston. Its 
records continue, but with many breaks, until 1786. This 
may be taken as the probable limit of their ability to hold 
business meetings. Their first meetings were held in a pri- 
vate house, but they had a meeting-house as early as 1715- 
They did not come into the title to their property until 1731, 
when it was secured for them through English Friends. It 
was then conveyed to trustees, but the last survivor claimed 
the property as his own, locked up the meeting-house and 
would allow no meetings there. At this juncture Philadel- 
phia Friends appeared on the scene, purchased all the claims 

^Memoirs and Letters, New York, 1844, 164-178, 264. 



Oi ISuutfiern Quakers and iSlaccrij. 

of the heirs of this ori.c^inal trustee and then vested the prop- 
erty in others. Philadelphia Friends incurred much trouble 
and expense and got little return, for there did not " appear 
to be more than fifteen members in the place" in 1791;' the 
property was going to decay and some of their agents were 
dishonest. In 1796 the property was transferred to Bush 
River Monthly Meeting, but there was little improvement, 
and as this meeting had become very weak in the mean- 
time, trustees of North Carolina Yearly Meeting, appointed 
for the purpose, reconveyed the property to Philadelphia 
Yearly Meeting in 1812. Several unsuccessful efforts have 
been made by North Carolina Yearly Meeting since that 
date to again get possession of the property. The meeting 
for worship was finally laid down in 1837, when only three 
persons attended, two of whom were not Friends. The 
meeting-house was burned in 1837; a new one was built in 
1856, but burned in 1861. In 1875 the income from the lot, 
on which there was a dwelling, amounted to some $12,000. 
The sum of $4,000 was reserved to build a meeting-house in 
Charleston whenever there should be a sufficient number of 
Friends to hold a meeting, and an act of the South Carolina 
Legislature of 1876 authorized Friends to spend a part or 
the whole of the remainder in building, or in repairing, 
meeting-houses elsewhere. A number of meetings in North 
Carolina have been helped from this fund. The property 
remains i?i statu quo. 

* The meeting on the Edisto seems to have been at first en- 
tirely independent in government. It was possibly due to 
the work of a few zealous Charleston Friends. Job Scott 
says he found in 1789 "a little meeting of Friends though 
not members," about fifty-eight miles from Charleston, while 
on his way to Wrightsborough, Georgia. This is evidently 
the same as the meeting on the Edisto mentioned by Wil- 
liam Savery in 170T. " Left the city and got to T. Lewis's the 
5th, about 54 miles. Here are about seven families who 
have built a small meeting house, being convinced mostlv 



' Savory's Journal, in Friends'' Library, I., 329. 



Expansion in the Eightaenth Ceidurij. 95 

without instrumental means; they meet in the manner of 
Friends twice a week, and appear to be an innocent people." ' 
They seem to have been at that time an entirely independ- 
ent organization, for Thomas Scattergood tells us that they 
met, but did not have the consent of Bush River Monthly 
■Meeting. But a committee was appointed " to take some 
care of matters here," ^ and in 1 798 they were under the con- 
trol of that body. 

These two meetings seem to have had little in connnon, 
as far as the origin goes, with the other four centers of 
Quaker influence in the central part of South Carolina. 
These centers were Pee Dee and Gum Swamp in Marl- 
borough County, Wateree in Kershaw County, Bush River 
in Newberry County, and Cane Creek in Union County. 
These last were the product, mostly, of the southward mi- 
gration and will be treated in the second part of this chapter. 
It will be noticed also that these coast settlements were 
nearly all planted during the infancy of Quakerism and that 
they never extended to Georgia. 

We may say, in a general way, that the meetings men- 
tioned above, except Carver's Creek and Dunn's Creek, rep- 
resent the expansion of the native element in the three States. 
It represented men of English descent almost exclusively. 
It was less progressive than the foreign element, which we 
are now to study, because it came less in contact with others, 
was more provincial, had less new blood, and so got fewer 
new ideas. Further, these meetings were called on to fur- 
nish many recruits to the newer meetings in the western 
parts of these States, and many others migrated to the West- 
ern States. The result has been that these older meetings 
have either disappeared entirely from the history of the 
States or have sunk to a subordinate position. The largest 
and most progressive meetings found in North Carolina to- 
day are not among the representatives of the native stock, 
but among those who came in from the North during the 



' Friends' Library. I. , 330. - Ibid. , VIII. , 42-13. 



9(3 Southern Quakers and Slavery. 

eighteentli centun-. It is the planting and the development 
of these meetings that we are now to trace. 

2. — T/ir Replanting of SoutJicrn Quakerism. 

In the half-century included between 1732 and the close 
of the Revolution a new and vigorous element was in- 
jected into the life of Southern Quakerism. Most of these 
new settlers were from Pennsylvania, but some had de- 
layed a few years in Maryland; some were from New Jersey, 
and some from Nantucket. Some were of English an- 
tecedents, but many were Pennsylvania Germans, and some 
were Welsh. The influence of these new settlers was so 
distinct and overwhelming that I have ventured to call this 
movement the replanting of Southern Quakerism, for had 
this movement not taken place, Quakerism would hardly 
be an appreciable factor in these States to-day. 

These immigrants seem to have had but one motive in 
coming South. This motive was distinctly economic. Their 
movement is parallel to that of the Scotch-Irish. These 
two waves passed over the same ground at the same time, 
but the two did not intermingle, for the gentle and peace- 
loving Friend, who decried all war, avoided the holding 
of office, sought not his own, and put his abiding faith in 
the personal presence of God, free grace and the powers 
that be, had little in common with the restless, aggressive, 
fighting, ruling Scotch-Irish, or with the democratic but 
stern tenets of Calvinism. 

About 1725 the vanguard of the Quaker movement ap- 
peared at Monocacy, Maiyland. Here, like a true wave 
of Teutonic migration, it rested for a time. It reached 
Hopewell, Va., in 1732, and the next twelve or fifteen 
years were spent in subduing northern Virginia. In 1743 
an advance-giiard had gotten as far as Carver's Creek, in 
Bladen County, N. C. The next twenty years are marked 
by the swarms of Quakers that came pouring into the 
central sections of North Carolina, many of them falling 



Expansion in the Eighteenth Century. 97 

by the wayside, however, in Campbell and Bedford coun- 
ties, Va., where South River Monthly Meeting was orga- 
nized, in 1757. From about 1760 to the Revolution the 
horde passed through North Carolina and pressed into 
South Carolina and Georgia. 

• Like a true migration again, this movement did not take 
the form of an overflow, but of successive waves. Many 
parts of the line of march were comparatively or even ab- 
solutely free from Quakers. It is idle for us to speculate 
on the reasons why they settled in the particular sections 
they did. It is possibly due to that " invincible attraction " 
which Walter Bagehot points out as playing such an im- 
portant part in the formation of national character. Some 
accidental advantage, perhaps the excellence of the soil, 
located the first immigrant, and the gregarious instinct did 
the rest. 

It now becomes us to narrate the planting of these meet- 
ings more in detail. 

The beginning of this new movement southward, the 
counterpart of the movement of the next century west- 
ward, is to be found in the Hopewell settlement in Frederick 
County, Va. About 1725, Friends from Salem, N. J., and 
Nottingham, then in Pennsylvania, but thrown by Mason 
and Dixon into Maryland, settled in the upper part of 
Prince George County, Md., near the Monocacy, a tribu- 
tary of the Potomac. They were erected into a meeting 
by New Garden Monthly Meeting, Pa. In 1732 Alexander 
Ross and a company crossed the Potomac, and thus initiated 
the migration of which we are now to write. In that year 
they obtained a charter for 100,000 acres of land situated on 
Opequan Creek, a tributar\^ of the Potomac in what is now 
Frederick County, A^irginia.^ A settlement was begun here 
by Alexander Ross, Josiah Ballenger, James Wright, Evan 
Thomas and other Friends from Pennsylvania and Elk 

'The surveys for Ross's warrant were made along Opequan 
Creek, north of Winchester, and up to Apple-pie Ridge. See 
Kercheval, History of Valley of Virginia. 



98 Sou t Iter n (Quakers and Slavery. 

River, Md.' A meeting called Hopewell, or Opeckon, was 
established the same year, and one called Providence in 
^733- i liey were organized in 1735 into Hopewell Alonthly 
Meeting, under the auspices and care of Chester Quarterly 
Meeting in Pennsylvania." 

In 1733 other Friends removed from Bucks County, Penn.., 
and settled in Fairfax, now Loudoun County, about ten 
miles south of the Potomac, east of the Hopewell settle- 
ment, and near where the town of Waterford now is. When 
these parties settled in northern A'irginia there were no 
Quakers in this section, and few inhabitants. The meeting 
for worship of the Fairfax settlement was at first held in 
the house of Amos Janney, the first Quaker settler here. 
The Janneys became a large and influential family, pro- 
duced among others the historian, Samuel McPherson 
Janney,'' and some of the name still reside in the county. 
The meeting was called Fairfax, and dates from 1733. A 
meeting-house was erected in 1741 and called by the same 
name. In 1744 Fairfax Monthly Meeting was established. 

' Januey. III.. 248. ''Bowden, II., 249 ; Records. 

^ Samuel M. Janney was born in Loudoun County, Virginia, Janu- 
ary 11, 1801. His ancestors were from Cheshire and had been 
among the earliest converts to Quakerism. They removed from 
Bucks County, Pennsylvania, about 1745. On the division he be- 
came a Hicksite and labored long in the work of the ministry. He 
visited nearly or quite all of Friends' meetings in America ; 
was liberal in his feelings toward the other branch ; was earnest in 
promoting a better educational system in Virginia, and constant in 
his efforts to advance the cause of emancipation, being once pre- 
sented by the Grand Jury for a paper on emancipation. During 
the Civil War he was useful in ameliorating the horrors of war for 
the Virginia counties lying on the border, by reason of his interces- 
sions with the Federal Government and the respect entertained for 
him by the Confederates. In 1S69 he was appointed by President 
Grant superintendent of Indian affairs and served until 1871. He 
died in Loudoun County, Va., April 30. 18S0. In literature he was 
the most prolific of all the Southern Quakers. Besides a number of 
books and pamphlets on doctrinal matters, he published a volume of 
I)oems in 18:JU ; a Life of William Penn (Philadelphia. 1852). a Life 
of George Fox. and A History of the lieligious Society of Friends, 
from its Rise to the Year 1828, in four volumes (Philadelphia, 1861- 
1870). A memoir of his own life, properly an autobiography, ap- 
l)eared in Philadelphia in 1881. 



Expansion in the Eighteenth Century. 99 

This also became a branch of Chester Quarterly Meeting 
and Philadelphia Yearly Meeting/ 

These meetings soon attracted the watchful care of trav- 
eling Friends. John Fothergill visited them in 1736. The 
state of the Society in Virginia, he said, was " low and 
painful"; those advanced in years were, in general, "very 
insensible of true feeling, or suitable zeal for truth's ad- 
vancement in themselves, their families or the church." 
John Churchman (i 705-1 775) went down in 1741 to see 
if the Friends at Fairfax " were in number and weight 
sufficient to have a meeting settled amongst them." He 
also visited the families on the Shenandoah and says, " I 
believe that the delight in hunting, and a roving idle life, 
drew most of them under our name to settle there." ' 

The meetings in Loudoun, Fairfax and Frederick coun- 
ties were never as distinctively Virginian as those farther 
south. They looked first to Philadelphia Yearly Meeting, 
and after 1789 to Baltimore Yearly A^Ieeting. Their dis- 
tance and the inconvenience in traveling were doubtless 
important factors in this division. Then, too, the origin of 
the settlers had its effect. They were an offspring of the 
Pennsylvania meetings and looked naturally to them.' 

These meetings in turn began to extend their boundaries. 
Various meetings were established in Frederick, Loudoun, 

' Janney, III.. 248-249. = Journal, 66, 67. 278, 279, 319. 

'Friends at Hopewell had not purchased their lands from the 
Indians. This gave great uneasiness to Chalkley, who in 1738 had 
urged the Society to "endeavor to agree with and purchase your 
lands from the native Indians or inhabitants." The matter was not 
settled at once, and it gave Hopewell meeting so much trouble that 
in 1765 they declined to give certificates of removal until they 
learned whether the site of the proposed settlement had been pur- 
chased from the Indians. In 1778 the Monthly Meeting said that 
"Notwithstanding it may by this distance of time be difficult to 
find out the particular tribe that occupied these lands, yet it becomes 
us, as a religious Society, to demonstrate that testimony of justice 
and uprightness which we have ever held forth." They made an 
effort to find the Indian owners, and in 1794 the Tuscaroras laid 
claim to the reward, evidently with the purpose of exploiting the 
scrupulous Friends. It was shown that they had no riglit to it. 
But a valuable present was given them, as they '' entertained strong 
expectations of receiving a donation." (Janney, III., 266, 440-441.) 



iUO xSoiitltcrn (Jiualccr.s and fSlaccry. 

Culpeper and the adjoining counties. In 1756 a meeting- 
house was built and a meeting settled at Goose Creek. In 
1760 Crooked Run meeting was settled. A monthly meeting 
was established at Crooked Run in 1782, and one at Goose 
Creek in 1785; at Southland in 1789, or earlier: and at 
Alexandria in 1802. ]\ligration from Pennsylvania to north- 
ern X'irginia continued brisk until the Revolution. Day, 
Barrett, Beeson, Piggott, Sidwell, Kirk, White, Brown, 
Wilson, Ross, Johnson, Bailey, Carter, Ballinger, Pugh, 
Rees, Branson, Webb and Wright were the names of some 
of the families that came south from Pennsylvania and 
settled in this section. There were in this immediate section 
one quarterly and five monthly meetings, with twenty or 
more meetings for worship. There was much interchange 
between these meetings; as the settlers increased in num- 
bers they took their certificates from the older meetings like 
Hopewell and I-'airfax to the newer ones like Goose Creek. 
The meetings in this locality are now reduced to about 
eight. In the schism in 1828 a majority accepted the views 
of Hicks. The census of 1890 gives 96 as the number of 
Orthodox and 506 as the number of Hicksite Friends in 
Fairfax, Frederick and Loudoun counties. Friends have 
entirely disappeared from the adjoining counties of Cul- 
peper, Stafford and Orange, \"a., as well as from Hamp- 
shire, Berkeley and Jefferson counties, W. Va., in all of 
which they had members during the last centur}-. 

We may safely conclude that the meetings in Campbell 
and Bedford, Pittsylvania and Halifax counties, \a., were 
built up almost entirely by this southward movement. There 
were two monthly meetings in this section. South River and 
Goose Creek. The former dates from 1757; the latter, 
which is not the same as the Goose Creek Monthly Meet- 
ing in the Hopewell Quarter, from 1794. These monthly 
meetings applied for a quarterly meeting. It was granted 
in 1797, and was known as Western Quarterly Meeting; 
but the number of Friends in the section decreased so much 
that Goose Creek Monthly Meeting was laid down in 1814 



Erpansioti in the Eighteenth Century. 101 

and the Western Quarterly Meeting in 1817. South River 
Monthly Meeting survived the Virginia Yearly Meeting, 
and was laid down in 1858. These meetings lay in the 
direct path of southern immigration. I conclude that they . 
received most of their increase from persons who got 
stranded, as it were, on the way South. But they were 
also a mixture of the native and foreign elements. The 
Clarks of Louisa and Albemarle counties, and the Terrells 
of Caroline, seem to have been in the Society before 1730, 
and had been turned toward Quakerism by the preaching of 
Joseph Newby of North Carolina. The Lynch family, from 
whom the city of Lynchburg is named, and who have 
also given us the term " lynch law," became members about 
1752. It was the widow of Charles Lynch, died about 1753, 
Irishman and founder of the family, who organized the 
meetings in this locality. The Lynches, Davises, Johnsons, II 

Cadwalladers, Douglasses, Anthonys, Holloways, Strattons, — '")(A'^^'^' 
Fishers, Stantons, Moormans, Burgesses, Butlers, Pid- 
geons, Perdues, were some of the prominent Quaker fam- 
ilies in Campbell and the adjoining counties.' At a later 
period the migration from northern Virginia became more 
frequent. Between 1775 and 1800 we find thirty parties, 
some with families, taking certificates from Fairfax and 
the northern Goose Creek Alonthly Meetings to South 
River Monthly Meeting. 

But before the meetings were strong enough to stand 
alone in south-central Virginia, many emigrants had gone 
beyond them and passed down into North Carolina. The 
large settlement of Friends in Alamance, Chatham, Guil- 
ford, Randolph and Surry counties was formed by Quaker 
immigrants, not by the expansion of the native element. 
This stream of immigration was strong and healthy. It 
added a stable element, fortified still further by the presence 

'Cabell, Sketches and Recollections of Liinchbui-g, 24 et seq., and 
Records. Lynchburg was founded in 1786 by John and Charles 
Lynch, sons of the immigrant, John Clark, Achilles Douglass. 
Micajah Moorman and others. The site of the city was the property 
of the Lynch family. See Howe. Historical Collections of Virginia. 



0) 



^^ Lv^N^' 



102 ^^ondtcni QuaJccrs and >ylarcri/. 

of tlirift. frugality and energy, to the making of the State. 
These immigrants have been ignored by the historians of 
the State; but tliis has not been because of the lack of ma- 
terials. 

The earliest of these meetings in North Carolina seems to 
have been that at Carver's Creek, in Bladen County. It was 
so named from the founder of the settlement, who removed 
from Pennsylvania. It was begtm about 1740, and asked 
for a monthly meeting as early as 1743; in 1746 one had 
been settled. It belonged to the Eastern Quarter. We 
find among its representative families (mostly 1749-52) 
Carver, Clayton, Benbow,^ Beals, Ballinger, Channess, Cox, 
Kemp, ]\Iayer, ]\Iathews, Sommers, Wright, Clark. J\Iost 
of these settlers were from Fairfax Alonthly fleeting, Va., 
but others were from Pennsylvania. We find that at least 
fourteen parties, some with families, had removed to it. 
Unfortunately we know little of its history, for the records 
are lost. It continued till toward the close of the century; 
about 1797 it broke up, some of its members going west, 
and others joining their Quaker brethren in Guilford and 
Randolph. About the same time a monthly meeting was 
established at Dunn's Creek, probably either in Cumber- 
land or Bladen County. Richard Dunn was probably the 
founder and leader in the settlement. Its connection was 
at first with the Eastern Quarter, for in 1746 Thomas Nich- 
olson and others visited it as a committee of the Eastern 
Quarterly Meeting to quiet some troubles there. Some of 
these settlers had come from Pennsylvania, and they had 
a meeting-house as early as 1746. It was joined to the new 
Western Quarter by North Carolina Yearly ^Meeting in 
1760. It was at this time, perhaps, half as strong financially 
as Cane Creek or New Garden. It did not prosper from this 
time, and was laid down in 1772. the first monthly meeting 
to be laid down within the limits of North Carolina Yearly 
Meeting. In 1781 the meeting for worship disappears also. 

' Ancestors of the family in Ouilford County. 



Expansion in the Eijjhteenth Centurij. 103 

The oldest of these meetings which has come down to 
the present is Cane Creek Monthly Meeting, in Alamance 
County. This was established in December, 1751, by 
Eastern Quarterly Meeting, then the only one in the Yearly 
Meeting. There were then some thirty families in the sec- 
tion, and some of the certificates presented were dated in 1748 
and 1749, indicating that the settlement was of some standing. 
Fortunately the records of the monthly meeting have been 
preserved. During the four years, 1751-54, sixty-eight cer- 
tificates were presented to this monthly meeting; of this 
num.ber twenty-eight came from various meetings in Penn- 
sylvania; two came from Hopewell and six from Fairfax; 
seven from Camp Creek, Va. ; two from New Jersey; one 
from Falling Creek. N. C; one from Gunpowder, Md.; and 
one from Ireland. The records indicate that they were 
mostly young men without families. Who were some of 
these founders of the present strongholds of Quakerism in 
North Carolina? John Powell, Joseph and John Doan 
came from Bucks County, Pa.; Simon Dixon, John Stan- 
field, John Lambert, Solomon, William and Thomas Cox 
came from Newark in Kennet, Pa.; William Reynolds, 
Richard Sidwell, Jeremiah Piggott, from East Nottingham; 
Isaac Jackson and Thomas Lindley, from New Garden, 
in Chester County; Joseph and Benjamin Ruddick, Matthew 
and William Ozburn, from Warrington; James and Robert 
Taylor, from Exeter; Bowater Beales, from Fairfax, Mont- 
gomery County, Pa.; Thomas Carr, from Gunpowder; John, 
Martha and William Hiatt, Aaron Jones, Eli Vestal, Ben- 
jamin and William Beeson, Mordecai Mendenhall, Thomas 
and William Thornburg, William Hunt, the Edwardses, 
Baldwins, Knights, Dillons, Millses, Joneses and Browns, 
from Hopewell. The Summers, Ballingers, Hunts, Mat- 
thews and Coxes came from Fairfax; the Hendersons, 
Clarks, Hoggatts and Moormans, from Camp Creek. 

Nor were these men by any means idle after their arrival. 
William Reckitt, who was there in 1757, gives the sum of 
their histor\' in a nutshell : " There is a larsre bodv of Friends 



104 Southern Quakers and Slavery. 

gathered thither in a few years from the several provinces. 
They told me they had not been settled there above ten years, 
but had found occasion to build five meeting-houses, and 
then wanted one or two more. I had good and seasonable 
opportunities among them." ' 

Their zeal and activity appear clearly in their minutes 
also. This monthly meeting was set up in 1751; the same 
year a meeting for worship was set up at New Garden, and 
the monthly meeting was held by turns at Cane Creek and 
Mew Garden. Deep River midweek meeting was set up 
in 1753: Eno week-day and Xew Garden Monthly Meeting 
in 1754. This was the expansion of the first four years. 

During the next twenty years. 1755-75, a pretty steady 
stream of immigrants came to the Cane Creek Meeting, 
but owing to the imperfection of the records — a thing that 
is very rare among Quakers — we are ignorant of their origin. 
^^'ith the Revolution the tide of migration changed; many 
went to other meetings, and some passed on to South Caro- 
lina and Georgia. This movement was hastened no doubt 
b}' the War of the Regulation. Eight certificates of removal 
were granted in 1772, and between 1771 and 1775 twenty- 
two removals occurred, but the interchange of residence 
among Friends was so frequent that the general average of 
its population was probably maintained. 

When we come to the Xew Garden settlement we have 
an open field from 1754. The monthly meeting was es- 
tablished this year, and their records, kept with the scrupu- 
lous fidelity of Friends, begin then and extend in an unbroken 
line to the present. Of the settlers w^ho formed the New 
Garden meetings the first to arrive were doubtless the ihi- 
migrants from Pennsylvania by way of Maryland. They 
brought the name with them from Pennsylvania. It has 
always been a characteristic of Quakers to reproduce the 
names of the sections with which they have been associated 
in former years. Many English Quaker names are repro- 

^ Journal, pp. 60-81. 



Expansion in the Eighteenth Century. 105 

duced in America. There is a New Garden and a Springfield 
in Pennsylvania. They were carried thence to North Caro- 
lina, and from there, in turn, to Indiana. 

The first settlement at New Garden was about 1750. In 
1 75 1 a meeting for worship was granted by Cane Creek 
Monthly Meeting, as we have seen.* For the next three 
years the monthly meeting circulated between Cane Creek 
and New Garden, and the latter was of enough importance 
in 1753 for Catherine Peyton and Mary Peisley to visit 
it and work for two months in the neighborhood. The 
settlement must have grown rapidly, for the monthly meet- 
ing was set up in 1754. This was the second monthly meet- 
ing set up by the Yearly Meeting out of the distinctively 
foreign element. New Garden was destined to become the 
most important meeting in the State, and was the mother 
of many others. In the first year, 1754, we have settlers 
coming in from Pennsylvania, from Hopewell and Fairfax 
meetings, Virginia. In this we see a revival of the idea of 
migrations. Dunng 1755 nine certificates were received, rep- 
resenting Pennsylvania and Virginia only. According to 
the official minutes of New Garden Monthly Meeting, which 
note all certificates received, there were brought in during 
the sixteen years, 1 754-70, inclusive, eighty-six certificates 
in all. Of these we have record that twent>'-four represented 
families. It is probable that there were more families than 
this. Of these eighty-six immigrants — the actual number 
of persons received into Society from outside sources — the 
records show that forty-five, including fourteen of the fam- 
ilies, came from Pennsylvania; thirty-five came from Vir- 
ginia, one from Maryland, and four from northeastern 
North Carolina. 



'About 1752, Richard Williams, with his wife, Prudence Beals, 
and two children, removed from Monocacy River, then in Prince 
George, now in Frederick County, Md., to Guilford County. N. C, 
and settled upon the lands where the New Garden meeting-house 
now stands. The county was then thinly settled. Williams gave 
the site for the meeting-house. 



106 Southern Quakers and Slavery. 

It will be of interest to us to see the names of some of 
the persons who were the leaders in this extensive migra- 
tion, for their children became prominent in the Society 
in North Carolina, and their grandchildren went to the 
West and became equally prominent there. From Warring- 
ton Monthly Meeting, Pa., there were twenty-three arrivals; 
among them were Isaac and Peter Cox, Peter, Nathan and 
Zacharias Dicks, Isaac Pidgen, John Beeson, Joseph Oz- 
bum, Isaac Jones, Jacob and Abram Elliott, Thomas Ken- 
dall, William Reynolds, James and Aaron Frazer. Eight 
came from Bradford ^Monthly Meeting; among them w-ere 
Ebenezer Worth, Phineas, John and Richard Mendenhall; 
while another Richard Mendenhall, William Reynolds and 
Thomas Dennis, Jr., came from New Garden, Pa.; eleven 
came from Cedar Creek Alonthly Meeting, Va., including 
Phillip Hoggatt, William and Zachariah Stanley, Robert, 
John and William Johnson; eight from Caroline Monthly 
Meeting, Joseph Hoggatt, Stringman and Nathan Stanley, 
Talton and James Johnson; eight from Hopewell and six 
from Fairfax; from Hopewell came Richard, Isaac, Na- 
thaniel and John Beeson, Benjamin Brittain, John Beals, 
James Langley, Joseph Hiatt; from the neighboring Fairfax 
came George Fliatt, William Kersey, Micajah Stanley, Wil- 
liam Ballinger; Joseph Unthank and family came from 
Richland, Bucks County, Pa.; James Brown, James Johnson 
came from East Nottingham, then in Pennsylvania, now in 
Man'land. While the westw^ard movement from the eastern 
North Carolina meetings was begun from Perquimans 
Monthly Meeting by Henry, Jacob and Joseph Lamb, who 
came up in 1760, and thus set in motion a movement that 
was to attain large proi^ortions fifty years later. 

The names given in the above lists do not represent all 
the Quaker settlers who came to central North Carolina 
between 175 1 and 1770, it gives only representatives of cer- 
tain families that have since attained considerable distinc- 
t'um in the section and who first made this and the surround- 



Expansion in the Eighteenth Century. 107 

ing Quaker settlements a success/ They represented some 
of the oldest and best Quaker families in Pennsylvania. The 
New Garden settlers were soon reinforced by other immi- 
grants who also came from old Quaker stock. These were 
the settlers from Nantucket Island, Mass. This movement 
began in 1771, and Libni Coffin was the first Nantucket man 
to arrive at New Garden. 

We get some particulars from the life of Elijah Coffin: 
" The island of Nantucket being small, and its soil not very 
productive, a large number of people could not be sup- 
ported thereupon. . . . The population of the island still 
increasing, many of the citizens turned their attention to 
other parts, and were induced to remove and settle else- 
where, with a view to better their condition as to provide 
for their children, etc. A while before the Revolutionary 
war, a considerable colony of Friends removed and settled 
at New Garden, in Guilford County, North Carolina, which 
was then a newly settled country. My grandfather [Wil- 
liam] Coffin [1720-1803] was one of the number that thus 
removed. His removal took place, I believe, in the year 
1773."" Again, Obed Macy,"* writing of the period about 
1760, says that because of the failure of the whale fishery 
some went to New Garden, N. C, others to Nova Scotia 
and Kennebec: "Very few of whom benefited themselves, 
and some, after a few years' stay, returned." Again, about 
the outbreak of the Revolution, because of the derangement 
of their business by the war, others went to New York and 
North Carolina. 



" In 1764, Friends had begun investigations to find out who were 
the original Indian owners of their new homes, in order that they 
might pay them for the land, as they were trying to do at Hopewell, 
Va. It was reported that the New Garden section belonged to the 
Cheraws, who had been since much reduced and then lived with 
the " Catoppyes "— Catawbas. The matter was referred to a future 
meeting and seems to have been dropped. 

- Page 10. This volume was published privately in 1863. See the 
same account substantially in the Reminiscences of Levi Coffin, 
Cincinnati, 1876. 

^History of Nantucket^ Boston, 1835. 



108 Southvni (Quakers and Slaccri/. 

In 1780 two-thirds of the inhabitants of Nantucket were 
Quakers. We find among their leaders the Coffins, Star- 
bucks, Folgers, Barnards and Husseys. Some of these be- 
came leaders in the Carolina migration, which was particu- 
larly large, 1771-75. During this period of five years 
there were no less than forty-one certificates recorded at 
New Garden Monthly Meeting from Nantucket out of a 
total of fifty certificates received. In this number there 
were eleven families, and it included many families that 
have since been prominent in that section of the State. We 
find among these immigrants Libni Cofifin, William (Jr.), 
William, Barnabas, Seth (and wife), Samuel (and family), 
Peter and Joseph Cofifin; Jethro Macy, David, Enoch, Na- 
thaniel, Paul (and family), Matthew- (and five children) and 
Joseph ■\Iacy; William, Gayer, Paul (and family) and Wil- 
liam Starbuck; Richard, William, Stephen, and Stephen 
Gardner; Tristrim, Francis and Timothy Barnard; Daniel 
Francis and Jonah Worth; John Wickersham; William 
Reece; Jonathan Gififord; Reuben Bunker; Nathaniel Swain; 
Thomas Dixon. 

This southward migration stopped almost as suddenly 
as it began. This was caused by the War of the Revolution. 
In 1775 there were eight certificates from Nantucket. In 
1776 there was but one. In that year the migration from 
Virginia begins again with an occasional belated settler from 
Delaware or Alaryland. But it never attained important 
proportions. During the seventeen years, 1 783-1800, there 
were thirteen certificates received, less than one a year; 
some came from Nantucket, the most from Pennsylvania, 
but these were partly counterbalanced by the five certificates 
granted to parties who returned to their old homes. 

It seems accurate to say that all of these new meetings 
had practically attained their full growth by the outbreak 
of the Revolution. Migration from the northward was 
steady until then. It then ceased largely, and from that time 
the meetings were kept up by the natural increase, not by 
the new arrivals. 



Expansion in the Eighteenth Century. 109 

From New Garden as a center most of the meetings in 
this section of the State take their rise. It was this monthly- 
meeting- which settled a first-day meeting at Centre in 1757 
and made it a monthly meeting in 1773. Thomas Scatter- 
good, while visiting this meeting in 1792, was told by Peter 
Dicks " that there were but four or five families settled near 
him, when he moved to this place, about forty years ago 
[1755, from Warrington M. M.]. They held their meeting 
first in a private house, then built a small meeting-house, 
which is yet standing and used for a school; and near it 
is a large meeting-house, built within these few years, and 
a large settlement of Friends." ^ 

New Garden Monthly Aleeting also established a pre- 
parative meeting at Deep River, in Guilford County, in 1758. 
This was made a monthly meeting in 1778 and a quarterly 
meeting in 181 8. In 1787 it estabUshed \^^estfield in Surry 
County. This became in due time the center of a large and 
important Quaker community; as a result, Westfield Quarter 
was set ofif in 1803. It consisted of the monthly meetings 
of Westfield and Mount Pleasant. The latter is of particu- 
lar interest from the fact that it lay partly in Grayson County, 
A'lrginia, and was a sort of stopping-place in the migration 
westward. Toward the close of the eighteenth century there 
were three or four flourishing meetings within its limits in 
Mrginia — Mount Pleasant, Chestnut Creek and Fruit Hill, 
all established in 1792. It received quite a number of mem- 
bers by certificate from the Mrginia Yearly Meeting, par- 
ticularly from the South River Monthly [Meeting. 

There was also a migration of Nicholites to this section, 
but the time of their arrival is unknown. The Nicholites 
were a religious sect who were organized in Caroline County, 
Maryland, about the time of the Revolution, by Joseph 
Nichols. It may be called the independent evolution of a 

^Friends' Library, VIII., 35. He also says that at Back Creek 
there was a settlement of Germans who held meetings by them- 
selves for a time like Friends. Later five or six of these families 
joined Friends. 



110 ^oiitlicrii Quakers and Hhivenj. 

Quaker Society, as we have seen was the case at Edisto, 
S. C, for the two societies were one in the vital, fundamental 
principle of their professions. They established a regular 
order of discipline about 1780, and organized three churches 
in Caroline County. It is probable that they migrated 
to North Carolina after the Revolution. Job Scott found 
some of them at Deep River in 1789, where they had a 
meeting-house. Scott says: "I had a lively evidence that 
some among them were humbly endeavoring to serve the 
Lord; but at the same time I saw clearly that many of 
them rested too much in their outside plainness; and valu- 
ing themselves upon that, and stopped short of more living 
acquaintance with the well-spring of eternal life." ' 

John Wighani visited them in 1795." In 1797 Joshua 
Evans was among them. " I had two favored meetings 
among a people called Nicholites. The first was largely 
attended by others; but at the close I requested a meeting 
with them and their children by themselves. In about half 
an hour they came together, and a solid instructive season 
it was. They appear to be plain, sober people, are re- 
puted honest in their dealings and otherwise maintain a 
good character. ... I observed they had nine queries, 
which in substance were much like ours; these they read 
at times in their meetings. The last one was this: 'Are 
Friends careful to bear a steady testimony against slavery 
and oppression in all its different branches, endeavoring in 
every thing to do to others as we in like case would have 
others do unto us?'"'' 

Stephen Grellet met some of them in 1800, Ijut from this 
time we hear no more of the Nicholites in North Carolina. 
About 1800 the ^Maryland branch joined themselves with 
Friends, and we may assume that the North Carolina branch 
followed their example. They disappear from the history 
of the State, and there is now but the faintest recollection 
of them in the section thev inhal)ited. 



^Journal. 208. ^Memoira. !52. 

' Jovriial. in FHends'' Miscdlany, X., 173-174. 



Expansion in the Eighteenth Century. Ill 

The new settlements had an immediate effect on the 
course of the travels of Friends in the South. In 1761 
Virginia and North Carolina were visited by Daniel Stanton 
(i 708-1 770), a Friend of Philadelphia, who had already- 
paid religious visits to England and the West Indies. He 
was accompanied by Isaac Zane. The route of their journey 
indicates that the center of Quaker population was drifting 
away from the Atlantic seaboard. This was particularly 
the case with North Carolina. There the Quaker immi- 
grants of a few years before were now predominant. 

Stanton and Zane crossed the Potomac, and after preach- 
ing in Fairfax and Frederick counties, passed almost di- 
rectly south. Their meetings were well attended and suc- 
cessful. Then to the meetings at Camp Creek, Fork Creek 
and Genito; then across James River to Amelia meeting, 
and across South River to Goose Creek. " That night we 
lodged at Peter Holland's, lying down in one room like 
a flock of sheep in a fold, being sixteen in number with 
the Friend's family." This entry will give some idea of 
the relative position of Friends in Virginia financially and 
socially. They were not among the wealthier Virginians. 
They had an experience of the same kind in North Caro- 
lina: "We stopped at a house to enquire for entertainment, 
where was a woman and several children. She gave us 
liberty for house room, and there being no bed for us we 
laid on the floor, and it being cold and snow falling, we 
were sometimes obliged to get to the fireside to warm us." ^ 

John Griffith covered much of the same ground in 1765, 
and gives us his opinions in plain language. His reports 
of the state of Society are gloomy and discouraging. He 
says he had " two poor small meetings " at Camp Creek 
and Fork Creek, " where the life of religion seemed to be 
almost if not wholly lost." On their way to the back set- 
tlements of North Carolina: "We had four small poor 
meetings, viz., Genito, Amelia and Banister, and a meeting 

' Journal, in Friends'' Library, XII., 168-172. 



112 SotitJtrni Quakers aiirl Shirc)-}/. 

at Kirby's, on the banks of Dan river; to some of them, 
many of other societies came, and gospel doctrine was 
opened largely for their help and information; in which 
labor there was good satisfaction; but alas! few under our 
name in those parts, let the true light shine before men, 
but were most of them stumbling blocks in the way of 
serious inquirers." Some of the North Carolina meetings 
were better than those in Virginia, and some were not. 
"We had a meeting at Centre; it was extremely cold, and, 
as some observed, the like had not been known there in 
the memory of man; and being quite an open meeting- 
house, and very little of anything to be felt amongst them 
of religious w^armth, it was really a distressing time in- 
wardly and outwardly." 

He was at the monthly meeting at Cane Creek. " This 
was large, but most of the members seemed void of a solid 
sense and solemnity; a spirit of self-righteousness and con- 
tention was painfully felt. ... I am persuaded many of 
those under our name have removed out of Pennsylvania 
and other places to those parts, in their ow^n wills, having 
taken counsel of their own depraved hearts, and when they 
have got thither, have set up for something in the church; 
but it seemed to me most of them were very vmfit for the 
spiritual building, not having been hewn in the mount. 
We went to their meeting on first day. but there was much 
darkness and death over them." ' 

The superiority of Carolina Friends over \^irginia Friends, 
both in temporal and spiritual affairs, is also shown clearly 
by Hugh Judge, who visited Southern Quakers in 1784. 
In speaking of his travels in the Hopewell section of Vir- 
ginia he says: "We arrived there safely; but though it was 
a poor place, it was much better than the former, for we 
got a tolerably good bed, and corn blades for our horses; 
but tliey had no bread, milk, cheese nor butter for us. I 
asked whether we could have some water boiled, which 

'.Jovnial, 370-380. 



Expansion in the Eighteenth Century. 113 

they did in a large kettle, for they were entire strangers to 
tea and tea-tackling, having nothing of the kind. However, 
getting some hot water, I made some tea in a quart mug; 
and, having tea and sugar as well as bread and meat with us, 
we fared pretty well on our own. 

" Set out before sunrise, and called at several places be- 
fore we could get any breakfast, or anything for our horses 
to eat. At length we obtained some corn blades for them, 
and a broken kettle to boil water for ourselves a breakfast. 
So sorrowfully poor is the situation and condition of many 
of the inhabitants of old Virginia that travelers are hardly 
beset to get a little refreshment; yet they abound with 
negroes." 

From Virginia Judge passed on to North Carolina and held 
meetings at Springfield and Muddy Creek: "Things carry 
a difrerent appearance here to what they did in Virginia. 
Here is a large body of Friends, many of whom appear 
livingly concerned for the right ordering of things amongst 
them." ' 



When South Carolina is reached there is found to be no 
essential difference in the evolution and development of 
the meetings in the northern and central part of the State, 
save that immigrants coming into this province, 1760-75, 
unlike those in Virginia and North Carolina, found some 
Quaker meetings already established in their line of march. 
Two of these, Pee Dee and Gum Swamp, were in Marl- 
borough County, S. C. " The Friends there," says Reckitt, 
" though their circumstances in the world were but low, 
treated us very kindly. Their love to truth and diligence 
in attending meetings are worthy of notice; for they had 
nigh one hundred miles to go to the monthly meeting they 
belonged to, and I was informed very seldom missed at- 

^ Journal, 33-48. 



114 ISuullicni Quakers and Slavery-. 

tendings it." These Friends " were truly glad to see us, 
they being seldom visited." ' 

Another Quaker meeting on their line was that at Wateree. 
It was in, or near, Camden, in Kershaw County. It was 
also known as the Fredericksburg or Camden meeting. 
Mary Peisley and Catherine Peyton visited it in 1753. They 
found the Society very low as to religious experience, but 
" some of the youth were under a divine visitation, which 
afforded comfort and encouragement." " Reckitt visited them 
in 1757, and says " several of the Friends from Ireland had 
been settled about six or seven years." ^ 

They seem to have grown rapidly, for in 1755 we find 
Wateree mentioned as a monthly meeting, but whether it 
was established by North Carolina Yearly Electing we do 
not know. In 1757 we find that certificates were taken 
from New Garden to Wateree, and in 1761 parties returned 
to New Garden. In 1762 they Avere visited by William 
Hunt of North Carolina. So far as any evidence to the 
contrary is to be found, this monthly meeting, as well as 
other meetings in South Carolina, at first led a purely in- 
dependent existence. They were congregational as far as 
government goes, and it seems some did not elect at first 
to come under North Carolina Yearly ]\Ieeting. Up to 
this time all South Carolina Quakers seem to have come 
by the sea route. Charleston, Edisto, Wateree, were all 
of the same character in this respect. But when the south- 

'This meeting belonged to the Cane Creek Monthly Meeting, 
North Carolina, and all that Reckitt says of their faitlifulness in 
attending their liusineps meetings is borne out bj' the records. 
Prior to the organization of the Bush River Quarter in 1791 it was 
seldom that the monthly meetings of South Carolina and Georgia 
did not have rei)refientatives at the Western Quarterlj- Meeting. 

'Janney. III.. 318.319. 

'In the Life of James Gough. London. 17^3, p. 101, vre find an 
account of some families of P'riends who "came to Dublin to 
embark for Korth Carolina, to settle on my cousin Arthur Dobbs's 
lands there, wlio was their landlord at Timahoe. '■ By mistake the 
captain carried them to South Carolina and they settled in that 
jtrovince. They are i)robably either the Friends at ^Vateree or at 
Pee Dee and Gum Swam]), although there is a slight discrepancy in 
dates, as Dobbs did not come to North Carolina until 1754. 



Expansion in the Eighteenth Century. 115 

ward migration swept over North Carolina and reached 
South Carolina these older meetings became less important 
relatively, and their connection with North Carolina Yearly- 
Meeting becomes more distinct as the immigrants become 
more powerful. In 1768 Fredericksburg Monthly Meeting was 
joined to the Western Quarter of North Carolina Yearly Meet- 
ing, and was held at Bush River, which was a settlement 
mostly of parties who had come overland from the north. In 
1770 a committee was appointed to investigate the state 
of these Friends. They recommended the settlement of 
a monthly meeting at Bush River, in Newberry County, 
which was done, and that Fredericksburg Monthly Meet- 
ing " should return to the Wateree until further orders." 
This was also done, and from this time Bush River in- 
creases while Fredericksburg decreases. It dragged its 
slow length along through the Revolution and w^as laid 
down about 1782. Job Scott was there in 1789. " I had 
a very small, yet precious meeting at Camden, S. C, 
where no member of our Society liveth, except one very 
ancient woman; though once there was a settled meeting 
of Friends there." ^ To this meeting there had come the 
families of Lamb, Parkins, Cox, Smith, Thomas, Pierson, 
Gant. 

The group of meetings clustering around Bush River was 
the most important in South Carolina. The origin of this 
meeting and the time it began cannot be discovered. Wil- 
liam Coate was living near Bush River before 1762, and 
Samuel Kelly, a native of King's County, Ireland, removed 
to Newberry County, from Camden, in 1762. Other early 
Quaker settlers were John Furnas, David Jenkins, Ben- 
jamin and William Pearson. Robert Evans came from 
Camden, probably between 1762 and 1769. Judge John 
Belton O'Neall, author of T/ie Befich and Bar of South 
Carolina, and of the Annals of Newberry, had a birth- 
right membership in this meeting. His parents were both 

^Journal., 193. 



11<> Southern Qualrr.'^ a}id Slarcrji. 

from Antrim, Ireland, and this would indicate a mixture 
of races in the settlement. We ma}'^ conclude that it had 
the Irish as a base, with a superstratum of immigrants from 
the States to the north/ Samuel Neale reports that they 
were strong in 1771.' This was about the beginning of the 
overland migration from the northward. These immigrants 
caused them to enlarge their borders. A meeting was es- 
tablished at Padgett's Creek in 1774, and in the same year 
we find mention of '' Cane Creek meeting on the waters of 
Tiger River." This became a monthly meeting before long, 
and the same year another meeting was wanted by Friends 
of Little River. It is only from 1772 that we have the 
record of certificates. Between 1772 and 1777, six years, 
there were twenty-nine certificates taken to Bush River 
Monthly Meeting. Of these, fourteen came from Pennsyl- 
vania, ten from North Carolina, two from Mar>4and, two 
from \'irginia. Migration came, therefore, we can easily 
see, in part from the country that had supplied the meet- 
ings of middle North Carolina and partly from these meet- 
ings themselves. The tide had set toward the South, and 
in its onward movement swept with it many who had stop- 
ped in A^irginia or Carolina for a season or for a number 
of years. The list of settlers within the limits of Bush 
River included persons by the name of Pearson, Coppock, 
Merrick, Clark, Edmundson, Galbreath, Harmar, Heaton, 
Battin, and others, from Pennsylvania; from North Caro- 
lina came some of the Mendenhalls, Joneses and Hender- 
sons. From Pine Creek, Md., came Benjamin \^anHom; 
Hannah Hooker came with four children from Gunpowder, 
Md. ; from Hopewell, Va., there came the families of Ruble, 
Haworth. Babb, Taylor, Pearson, Jay, Jacob, Bull. Hol- 
lingsworth, Bufifington, Pugh," Barrett, Roberts, Thompson; 
from Fairfax, Mathews, Brown, Whitson; from Cane Creek, 
N. C, Bray, Cox, Thornton, Henderson; from New Garden, 



' Annals of Newherni, 30, 31. ^ JouniaL 179-185. 

^ Azariah Pugh. one of these immigrants, was the ancestor of 
Senator Pugli, of Ohio. 



Expansion in the Eighteenth Century. 117 

Brown, Jones, Mendenhall, Wickersham, Stewart. There 
were still others named Ballinger, Wright, Brooks, Gaunt, 
Hasket, Stedman, Edniundson, McCool, Miles, Reagan, 
Cook, Thomas and Duncan, most of whom came with the 
southward migration.^ 

To Bush River Monthly Meeting reported the meetings 
for worship at Bush River, Mudlick, Henderson's or All- 
woods, Rocky Springs, Raybourn's Creek, Charleston and 
Edisto; to Cane Creek jMonthly Meeting reported Cane 
Creek and Padgett's Creek. They were visited by most of 
the traveling missionaries after the Revolution. We have 
already quoted from Reckitt and Scott and Savery. Thomas 
Scattergood was there in 1792. He attended Padgett's 
Creek meeting, "which was large, but long in gathering; 
and when mostly settled, a rude company came past and 
disturbed it. Yet through favor we had a pretty good meet- 
ing afterwards." At Mudlick " a poor little company col- 
lected, but we fared much better than I expected." He 
then went to " Raban's Creek [Raybourn's Creek] meeting, 
held in a poor house with an earthen floor, which was 
damp with the beating in of the rain and snow. I thought 
on sitting down that it seemed a very poor beginning, but 
I was enabled to preach the gospel amongst them, and 
came aw^ay easy." " Went to a meeting at AUwoods ; very 
poor, and continued so for a season." On his return from 
Georgia, Scattergood went " to Rocky Springs meeting, 
which was large and mixed. A number of Anabaptists 
came to it." ^ 

There seems to have never been more than one Quaker 
center in Georgia. Quakers were particularly favored un- 

^ Records. See also Judge O'Nealle's Annals of Newberry. Judge 
O'Neall states that the screw augur was invented by Benjamin 
Evans, a Newberry Quaker. In 1779, a body of Friends from a 
" distant land," probably Ireland, settled within the limits of Bush 
River Monthly Meeting, but as they had no regular certificates. 
Western Quarterly Meeting advised that they be not received as 
full members. 

'^ Journal , in Friends'' Library, VIII., 37-42. 



118 ^utiUiirn (Juakvrs and Slavery. 

der the Georgia charter, but it is not probable that any 
Friends appeared in the colony early enough to avail them- 
selves of the advantages offered, Samuel Fothergill was 
the first Quaker preacher to visit Georgia. This was in 
1755- "I went thence [Charleston] to Georgia, and had a 
large meeting in the court-house, and some opportunities in 
the inn where I lodged, to some service, though there were 
not any there who bore our name." The vagueness of this 
letter leaves us in doubt as to the sections visited.^ 

The first effort at Quaker settlement was in 1758. In 
that year ** Certain Quaker families entered the province 
and formed a settlement about seven miles above Augusta 
upon a tract of land known to this day as the Quaker 
Spring. The territory within which they fixed their abodes 
had been formerly owned by a tribe of Indians called the 
Savannahs. Thence were they expelled by the Uchees, who 
occupied adjacent lands. Peacefully inclined as they were, 
these Quakers hoped to dwell in amity with the neighbor- 
ing Indians. While engaged in clearing lands and in build- 
ing comfortable homes they were alarmed by the intelli- 
gence that the Cherokees were on the eve of invading the 
white settlements. Without pausing to ascertain the truth 
of the report, they hastily abandoned the country, leaving 
behind them no trace of their short occupancy save a spring 
and a slender memory." " 

The next effort was more successful. On the third of 
July, 1770, the General Assembly of Georgia granted to 
Joseph Maddock (or Mattock) and Jonathan \Still. a tract p 
of 40,000 acres of land in St. Paul's Parish, Columbia (now 
McDuffie) County, Ga., to be held in trust for the Quakers. 
Here they began the town of W'rightsborough, on Town 
Creek, sixteen miles from Appling, the county seat, and 
named it for Sir James Wright, Governor of tlie colony.' 



' Memoirs and Letters, 283. 'Jones's Georgia. I.. 440. 

=> White's Statistics of Georgia, 1S49, p. 193; Crawford and Mar- 
bui y V I)igvst ol' the /.airs <-/ Georgia. 1S(I2, p. 892. It is to be noticed 
tliat the.su grantees li.ivc tin- same names as two of tlie men who 



Expansion in the Eighteenth Century. 119 

The records date from 1773. In that year a preparative 
and a monthly meeting were organized in Wrightsborough 
township by representatives sent from New Garden. The 
certificates recorded show that the Quaker population was 
made up of settlers from South Carolina, North Carolina, 
Virginia, Pennsylvania, and Burlington in West New Jer- 
sey. The outlook for a speedy development of their settle- 
ment was very promising when Indian troubles in 1774 
prevented further expansion/ We have an account of this 
Indian incursion from one who was so close to the sufferers 
that it may be interesting to reproduce. It is written by 
Rachel Price {.nee Kirk) in her Account of the Kirk Family 
(MS.)- It tells how her sister, Tamar Kirk, married 
Phineas Mendenhall and removed with him to Guilford 
County, N. C. This was about 1763. The account con- 
tinues: "I have retained the recollection of a young man 
of the name of John Wickersham, who was acquainted 
with my sister Mary. He went to Carolina some time after 
her, where they renewed their attachment and were mar- 
ried and settled there for a time, but the State of Georgia 
opened for settlement, inducing many to move there. 
My sisters and their families were both of them amongst 
those who went about 300 miles from their then settlement 
into the State of Georgia to a place settled by Joseph 
Mattock and Mattock's Settlement. There they lived in 
peaceable possession of their homes undisturbed by the 
natives for a considerable time until there was a new pur- 
chase made by Government, with which the Indians 
seemed dissatisfied. My brothers-in-law, with others, 
bought land in it; as it was considered very good, many 
were induced to make settlements on it, to clear and sow it 
with grain, but the frequent incursions of Indians was cause 
of great discouragement to them, so that it was deemed 

were concerned in the trouble in Cane Creek Monthly Meeting in 
1764. It is possible and probable that they were induced to migrate 
by the troubles that culminated in the War of the Regulation. 
'Jones's Georgia, II., 133. 



120 Southern Quakers and Slavery. 

best by many liot to reside on it. They therefore left it, 
but when the grain that they had sown was ripe, they 
thought that they would go there and gather it, the distance 
not being far from their first settlement where they re- 
sided. Sister Tamer, her husband and three sons went 
for that purpose, leaving their two daughters behind at home. 
Early one morning sister went to milk a cow they had 
with them; while her hands were thus engaged a party 
of Indians were lying in wait, fired on them, put an end to 
her useful life, also killed her eldest son; the youngest 
they took captive, and kept him in captivity about two 
years. They adopted him and were kind to him, and w'hen 
redemption was offered for him, he had become so much 
attached to them and to their manner of life, that it re- 
quired some persuading to get him from them. The father 
and other son made their escape. 

" This awfully trying circumstance made such an impres- 
sion on the minds of sister Alary and husband that they 
came as soon as they could get aw^ay to North Carolina to 
their former settlement. In that neighborhood they lived 
for many years. . . . They of later years moved with their 
children and their families to Indiana, where they are set- 
tled." 

There were then about twenty families in the Wrights- 
borough connection. They report at that time: " Aleetings 
are middling well kept up and love and unity subsist in 
a middling good degree amongst us." But the Indian 
incursion caused the population to become unsteady, and 
many returned to the older colonies. We find, how- 
ever, a few who ventured that far South during the W^ar 
of the Revolution. Daniel Williams went down from Penn- 
sylvania in 1/77 to Wrightsborough, and in 1778 writes 
back to the people of Pennsylvania: "I got liberty to move 
into an empty cabin near my uncle, where wo staid about 
six or seven weeks. During our abode there T dealt witli 
a man for 100 acres of land in the old purchase. There 
were about seven acres cleared, and a nice house just built 



Expansion in the Eighteenth Century. 121 

thereon, and about 40 bearing peach trees planted out. 
We moved there near the beginning of the second month, 
and I fell to grubbing and clearing a piece of ground, and 
got five acres ready to plant in corn in pretty good season, 
and have ten acres now growing of likely corn. . . . Our 
country is exceedingly fertile, and takes but little to render 
it complete. One discouragement there is to the settlement 
of it, and that is the frequent incursions of the savages, who 
almost every year cause some part of the settlement to 
break, though it is hard to penetrate above two or three 
miles within the English boundaries. Though we have 
often heard it was their decision to cut us off, yet the in- 
terposition of the Divine Hand has hitherto frustrated their 
intentions when no human power seemed sufficient. Not- 
withstanding discouragements of this kind appear, yet it 
is truly astonishing to see with what rapidity the country 
is settled and improved; this country which 11 years ago 
was a wild uninhabited wilderness. There are several peo- 
ple here this fall that are much indisposed with a fever 
that is not common in this country, for we have generally 
good water and clear, wholesome air in the middle of 
summer. ... I shall advise if any of our friends should in- 
cline to come out here soon, that they bring no more money 
with them than what will bring them out, for we have no 
scarcity of paper currency. I would be very desirous if 
brother Isaiah would send 10 or 12 lbs of iron out by 
William Benson, for it is a very scarce article here and 
rates I believe at $2.00 the pound." ^ 

Georgia Friends were drawn from all the meetings to the 
northward almost without exception. We find among them 
the families of Farmer, Pugh, Stubb, Jones, James, Vernon, v, AN/^C -, 
Moorman, Upton, Williams, Webb, Dixon, Seypold, Cop- ■^/.-^^''^ ^ 
pock. Brown, Hodge, Mendenhall. 

' Williams was born July 17, 1748, and died about 6 mo., 9th, 1800. 
His widow and her seven daughters moved after a few years to 
Stillwater, Ohio. Friends in South Carolina and Georgia suffered 
much from the effects of the war, and received donations from 
English Friends in 1783, but it was misused by the managers. 



122 SoutJivni (Quakers and Slavery. 

In 1789 Job Scott attended Friends' meeting at Wrights- 
borough, and the next day went to their '' new meeting- 
house, four or five miles from the first." ' I conclude from 
the journal of William Savery, who visited Georgia in 1791, 
that this new meeting was called ^lendenhall's, for some of 
that name went from North Carolina: "The 19th, had a 
meeting at Alendenhall's; a large number of Methodists 
and Baptists attended. Two women fell on their knees 
and trembled, and shook, and prayed and exhorted. I could 
scarcely account for such an extraordinary appearance." But 
we can account, for we see here the influence of primitive 
Methodism. He continues: "The 22nd being first day, had 
a meeting at Wrightsborough : the people of different pro- 
fessions and ranks came in great numbers; it was thought to 
be a solid, tendering time; but not feeling quite easy, I ap- 
pointed another at four o'clock in the afternoon, the people 
continuing in the woods. This was truly a relieving time, and 
we thought we had never witnessed so much brokenness 
throughout: they were loath to part with us, and many 
tears were shed on both sides. I endeavored as soon as 
possible to retreat, but they stopped the sulkey frequently, 
and seemed reluctant to let us go. Accompanied by sev- 
eral Friends, we passed on to Augusta."' 

Joshua Evans visited the Georgia meetings in 1797. He 
went up from Charleston and took the little meeting at 
Edisto on his way: " I had a meeting with them, in their 
meeting-place, which is a few logs put up like a house, 
with holes cut out for doors and windows, but all open 
without shutters. I told them I thought the condition of 
their house, if it continued, would be a dishonor to them 
and their good cause. 

" After a solid meeting in a Methodist house, at their re- 
quest, we travelled towards Augusta in Georgia; .... but 
being strangers, and without a guide, we met with some 
diflficulty in finding the place where our Friends reside. 

'Jovrnal. 198. 199. ^Journal, in Friends' Library, I., 830-331. 



Expansion in the Eighteenth Century. 123 

At length obtained information, and found them about 
thirty miles from Augusta, up the Savannah River in Co- 
lumbia County. We had a solid and satisfactory meeting 
with them, and also visited most of them in their families. 
Here are divers valuable members of our Society; one of 
whom is William Farmer, at whose house we had an even- 
ing meeting. 

'' We had the third meeting among them, which was a 
comfortable season; a number of Friends of Wrights- 
borough Monthly Meeting attended, on a request for per- 
mission to hold a meeting twice a week at William Far- 
mer's. With these friends, I went to Wrightsborough, and 
was at their fourth day meeting, which was closely exer- 
cising to me. Next day I was at a week-day meeting at 
Williams' Creek, about ten miles distant. It was a time 
of favor, a considerable number attending. I believe the 
Lord hath a little remnant in these parts, who testify against 
slavery and are favored to keep themselves clear. . . . Hav- 
ing visited near fifty families within the limits of the 
Monthly Meeting, I again attended their first day meeting, 
which was uncommonly large, many not being able to get 
into the house. . . . Thus we parted, and I came again to 
William Farmer's in Columbia County." ^ 

The Georgia meetings reported to the Bush River Quar- 
terly Meeting, and this in turn to the North Carolina 
Yearly Meeting. In 1775 we find Georgia mentioned in 
the North Carolina Yearly Meeting records. South Caro- 
lina had been mentioned for the first time in 1770. The 
change in the center was soon felt; in 1777 came Ihe propo- 
sition to remove the Yearly Meeting from the east; in 1786 
request was that it be held at Centre, in Guilford County. 
It was held here the next year, and then alternated be- 
tween the east and the west until 1812, when the last 
Yearly Meeting in northeastern North Carolina was held 
at Little River, 

Journal, in Friends'' Miscellany, X., 155-157. 



124 /S'o»///ier/i Quakers and Slavery. 

In 1 79 1 the monthly meetings at Bush River and Cane 
Creek, S. C, and Wrightsborongh, Ga., request a quarterly 
meeting among themselves. It was granted, and Avas 
known as Bush River Quarter. According to the Alma- 
nac of Isaac Briggs for 1799, there were then ten meetings 
in South Carolina and three in Georgia, all but one in the 
Bush River Quarter. Of the Georgia meetings, one was 
held at Wrightsborough, '' and two meetings held by per- 
mission at William Farmer's on third day; at Williams' Creek, 
fifth day." These meetings were probably among the first to 
decline. In 1799 the Assembly of Georgia incorporated a 
body of five trustees, authorized the Quakers to elect their 
successors, and authorized them to sell the land held there.* 
In 1800 Joseph Cloud, a minister of North Carolina who 
had been among the meeting on " the western waters," 
visited South Carolina and Georgia, no doubt in the in- 
terest of removal. Borden Stanton wrote them urging 
them to go west in 1802. A certificate from WVights- 
borough ]\Ionthly Meeting to Cane Creek Monthly Meet- 
ing, N. C, dated June 4, 1803, is the last evidence we have 
of Georgia Friends. They had departed to the great West. 

It is now possible for us to take a summan- review of 
the results obtained thus far. The promise of an aggres- 
sive and rapid growth made in the youth of Quakerism 
was not fulfilled in its maturer years. This promise was 
particularly clear in North Carolina. During the seven- 
teenth century the records show that the Society in that 
colony was quietly but steadily extending its outposts and 
was being strengthened by immigration and conversions. 
To such an extent was this true, that in 1716 Rev. Giles 
Rainsford writes to the S. P. G. that the " poor colony of 
North Carolina will be soon overrun with Quakerism and 
infidelity if not timely prevented by your sending over able 
and sober missionaries as well as schoolmasters to reside 
among them." ' But this almost phenomenal growth of the 

'Crawford and Marbury's Digest, 392. ' CV. Rec. II., 245. 



Exp 'sion in the Eighteenth Century. 125 

native element ceased soon after the Established Church 
became well organized. Quakers never played in North 
Carolina under royal government the part they had played 
under the government of the Proprietors. They were still 
less important, relatively, in Virginia. During the last 
third of the eighteenth century they obtained their fullest 
growth in each of the several States under consideration. 
Soon after the beginning of the nineteenth century their 
decline becomes visible. The period of highest and fullest 
growth has itself a period of depression. The Revolution, 
like the Civil War, was a time of suffering to the Quakers. 
Many left their ranks and were disowned to take part in 
the struggle for liberty, and the Society was muclT depleted. 
On the other hand, the convincements were much more 
numerous than they had been in former years. Despite all 
the care which Friends might use to keep unworthy and 
timid persons out of the Society, the number of " war 
Quakers " was considerable, and the Society did not pros- 
per for some years after the end of the war. 



CHAPTER VL 
Quaker Social Life. 

A study of Friends would be incomplete without some 
reference to their social life. I shall consider this subject in 
its broader aspects. 

One of the most important of the early questions demand- 
ing the attention of Friends was marriage. It seems that 
from the first marriage was kept strictly within the Society. 
As early as 1661 Friends had forced the English law to rec- 
ognize the legality of their forms of marriage. The initial 
step was by the parties who declared in meeting their inten- 
tions. The women's meeting then appointed a committee 
to see if the woman was " clear " from other " marriage en- 
tanglements " ; the men's meeting did the same, and when 
this was settled the parties were " left to their liberty to take 
each other," which was done by calling on the congregation 
as witnesses: "Friends, you are my witnesses that in the 
presence of you I take this my friend Elizabeth Nixon to be 
my wife, promising to be a loving and true husband to her, 
and to live in the good order of truth so long as it shall 
please the Lord that we live together or until death." 

It was necessary for them to guard against excesses on 
these festive occasions. Friends were warned to " keep out 
of superfluity at maredges and bueriels." At the latter no 
provisions for food and drink were to be made except for 
such as came from a distance. Again, it was directed " that 
Friends in general do take care to keep out of unnecessary 
providing of strong drink, , . . but to keep in christian 
moderation at births, burials and marriages." In 1714 
Chalklcy speaks of these entertainments as a " growing 



Quaker Social Life. 127 

thing amongst us," ^ and the use of Hquors among Friends 
is taken as a matter of course by Chalkley and Richardson, 
but Friends were ahvays opposed to excesses. 

Friends were appointed to attend marriages " as govern- 
ors ' of the marriage feast, and see that things are managed 
in decency and good order, and bring report to the next 
monthly meeting," and those who had attended a marriage 
as overseers reported that " things were managed in good 
order and according to truth." Friends were watchful for 
the orphan in the event of a second marriage. On one oc- 
casion Henr}^ Keaton and Elizabeth Scott, widow, appeared 
and declared their intention of marriage. Friends were ap- 
pointed " to see that the fatherless children have their due of 
their father's estate, also that Henry Keaton give security 
for the same." They were always advised against marrying 
outside of their own communion. We find many reports 
against Friends for " accomplishing disorderly marriages " 
and for " outgoings in marriage." They were frequently 
disowned for such marriages, and it was even an ofifense to 
be married at home instead of in meeting. 

The second marriage was a cause of considerable trouble. 
The Virginia meeting put the shortest limit at twelve 
months. This satisfied the Virginians, but the Carolinians 
believed more firmly in marrying early and often. They 
began with twelve months, but cut it down to eight. The 
conservatives again raised it to twelve, but this was too long 
a period of waiting, and in 1776 it was ordered that no 
widower should propose, or widow receive a proposal, under 
nine months. There could be no marriage between persons 
nearer akin than second cousins. An amusing instance of 
domestic infelicity comes to us from the Rich Square rec- 
ords. In 1801 John Knox was up before the meeting for 
whipping his wife. He was not " in a disposition to give 
Friends satisfaction but intimates that he through necessity 

' Journal, 82. 

' " Overseer " is the usual term in this connection, and it involves 
oversight of the whole event. 



128 Southern Quakers and Slavery. 

was in duty bound to do so in order for a better regulation 
in his family." He was disowned. 

Friends were warned against costly attire, " new fashions," 
"superfluity of aparil"; against "striped and flowered stuflfs 
in making or selling or wearing of them." They were to 
have no " faulds in their coats or any other unnecessary fash- 
ions or customs in their dresses." In 1752 one of the North 
Carolina meetings advised that Friends keep out of super- 
fluity of meats and drinks and apparel, viz. : " Coats and 
other Garments made after the new & superfluous fashions 
of the times and that no friend wear a WIG but such as ap- 
ply themselves to the IMonthly Meeting giving their reason 
for so Doing which Shall be Adjuged of by the said Meet- 
ing." But there were Friends who insisted on their right 
to " wair wigs," and the meeting desired instruction " in re- 
lation to the INIanner of Dealing with Those that had Gotten 
Wiggs Contrary to the order of the Yearly Meeting: And 
friends think proper to refer the Case to the next yearly 
meeting." The matter came up .duly: "After several dis- 
putes and conferences " the majority agree " that no person 
wearing a wig shall be dealt with so as to amount to a denial 
for that offence only." 

We find a testimony against excess in smoking in Vir- 
ginia as early as 1701, and those who used tobacco in North 
Carolina were warned to use it with " great moderation as 
a medison and not as a delightsom companion." Com- 
plaints were frequently based on the trio of evils, chewing 
tobacco, taking snuff, and sleeping in meeting. 

We find testimonies against such " vain and vicecious 
Proseedings as Frollicking Fiddling and Dancing." Some 
Friends delighted in plays of diversion; some were concerned 
in gaming and lotteries, and in 1777 a North Carolina 
Quaker was acting as clerk to a lottery. We do not see 
many indications that they drank liquors to excess, and at a 
later period they were forbidden to keep taverns and retail 
liquors. In these matters Mrginia Ouakcrs wore at least a 



Quaker Social Life. 129 

generation ahead of those in North CaroHna. In the former 
State distillers were to be disowned as early as 1782. 

During the earlier years of the Society Friends held many 
offices of trust and honor in the Carolinas. Daniel Ake- 
hurst, who was a judge, a councillor and secretary of the 
northern province; Francis Toms, a councillor; Governor 
John Archdale; Emmanuel Lowe, the son-in-law of Arch- 
dale; Thomas Symons, a judge of the general court, and 
others were members of the Society. In later years their 
sentiments in regard to the holding of office changed. They 
discouraged Friends from becoming members of the Legis- 
lature, and in 1787 actually tried one in North Carolina who 
became a justice of the peace. In 1809 it was proposed to 
North Carolina Yearly Meeting that any Friend who held 
office as a member of the Federal or State Legislature, as 
justice of the peace, clerk of the court, coroner, sheriff or 
constable, should be disowned. It was the same in Virginia. 
The explanation is that in filling these offices they must take 
and would frequently have to administer the oath; would 
have to assist in enforcing laws against slaves, and in execut- 
ing the death penalty. In more recent times the views of 
Friends in regard to office-holding have changed materially. 

Public paupers are never Quakers, for Quakers have 
always been thrifty and industrious. It was so in the earliest 
years of the Society. One of these early Quakers was Rich- 
ard Russell, of Norfolk County, Va. We know that he was 
fined to the amount of £100 sterling and 5,250 pounds of 
tobacco, but he had something at his death. His will was 
recorded January 24, 1667. He had a considerable library, 
which was distributed among his friends. He gave Richard 
Yates " a booke called Lyons play," " John porter junr. Six 
books," " John porter (i), my exer'r ten books," " Katherin 
Greene three bookes," " One book to Sarah Dyer," " unto 
Wm. Greene, his wife two books & her mother a booke," 
" Anna Godby two books," " Jno. Abell One booke in 
Quarto," " Richard Lawrance One booke." 



loO ^SuutJivni (Jitaktrs and ISkucrij. 

He gave half of his property to his wife. He gave an 
eighth to his executor: "the other pte of my Estate I give 
& bequeath One pte of itt unto Six of the poorest mens 
Children in Eliz: Riv'r, to pay for their Teaching to read & 
after these six are entred then if Six more comes I give a 
pte allsoe to Enter them in like manner." 

Would it be straining this gift too much to call it one of 
the comer-stones of the educational system of Virginia of 
to-day?' 

We have the inventory of William Bresse in 1701. He 
had made considerable gifts to the meeting at Levy Neck, 
Mrginia. In his inventory we find two and a half dozen 
pewter dishes, pewter " Pye " plates, candlesticks, sockets, 
porrengers, basons, flagons, and pots, brass kettles and pans, 
bell metal skillets, iron pots, also sheets, tablecloths, napkins, 
one damask tablecloth, fine towels, books, negroes, one Eng- 
lish man-serv-ant, sheep, horses, hogs, cows, " canvis," towel- 
ing, " doalis," "lynnen," Kersey broadcloth, "7 yards of 
painted calico," printed and colored linen; also the follow- 
ing silver articles: two large tankards, one large plate, one 
beaker, two dozen spoons, two forks, t\vo salt-cellars, one 
saucer, one sack cup, four dram cups. 

In 1717 John Hawkins bequeathed "3 score pounds" to 
the use of the Society in North Carolina. Friends were 
careful to warn their members against launching too heavily 
in business or getting more obligations than they could 
meet. In 1803 Friends decided that the bankrupt law 
could not excuse them from paying their debts. In Vir- 
ginia in 1 8 10, in the case of business failure, it was recom- 
mended that the party withdraw from the meeting until it 
was discovered that nothing discreditable had been done. 

Friends occasionally misbehaved in meetings. Storv re- 
marks in 1699 that the " noises and elevations " of some in 
North Carolina was hurtful. In 1702 many men were anx- 



' See John W. H. Porter'sjirticleonNorfolk Quakers, in Richmond 
DispftirJi. Dec. 3, 1893. and Virtjinia Hisforical Muijaziiic, I., 820. 



Quaker Social Life. 131 

ious to speak at the same time in the meeting in Virginia. 
Minutes were sometimes passed to make them pull off their 
hats in meeting, to keep them from calling the days of the 
week '' after the heathenish customs," and to keep out of 
drowsiness in meetings. 

In 1748 we find a committee appointed to sit in the gal- 
lery at the yearly and quarterly meetings to see that Friends 
behave themselves orderly. They were not to run in and out 
during service, and young people were not " suffered to sit 
too much in companies in the back part of the meeting 
house, without having some solid Friend or two to sit with 
them." 

There seems to have been an epidemic of worldliness 
about the beginning of the present century. They com- 
plain bitterly of " the great deviation from plainness so ap- 
parent amongst us." In 1824 they record their condemna- 
tion of " such articles of dress as lapell coats, bell crowned 
hats, rufifles, and ornamental ribbands, and the use of the 
word ' you ' to a single person [which] are such prominent 
traits of worldly fashions." And in 1826 we find a very 
curious minute in the journal of North Carolina Yearly 
Meeting: " On the subject of our deviations from plainness 
in dress and address, through the medium of an epistle from 
the yearly meeting of Indiana, we have received a very 
solemn message from the Indian Shawnee nation informing 
[us] that during a council which had lately been held 
amongst them, while they were under deep concern on ac- 
count of the many deviations from their ancient simplicity, 
and were laboring to reform their people, they likewise felt 
a concern for our society generally on the same account; 
stating that in former days, they knew us from the people of 
the world, by the simplicity of our appearance, which in 
times of war, had been a preservation to us; but'they have to 
lament that now there are many amongst us, whom they 
know not. by reason of their departure from our ancient 
plainness." 



132 SoiitlifDi (Jmikrrs and Sldirri/. 

The strugg-lc for plainness reached its cHniax in 1829, 
when the monthly meetings were instructed to continue 
" their labors in love with those that have artificial grave- 
stcncs in our grave yards, to have the same removed."^ The 
Quakers condemned the fashions and frivolities of society 
in others, but there were manners and customs among them- 
selves which they nursed as carefully and as persistently as 
the veriest devotee of the gay world, and in seeking after 
plainness of speech and simplicity of dress it sometimes 
happened that the Society strained at a gnat while its mem- 
bers were swallowing a camel.' 

lUit notwithstanding some weaknesses, there was in the 
Society, along with a vigilant care for political interests, for 
which their thorough organization made them better pre- 
pared, a deep and genuine piety, a tender love for souls, a 
deep sympathy with the erring, a watchful regard for the 
morals of the Society, and a strict determination to bring all 
misdemeanors to account. Friends were regularly ap- 
pointed to examine into and to report on the state of the 
Society. Did -a member neglect to attend on the means of 
grace, or was he guilty of " disorderly walking," he was 

' This is no doubt explained in part by the fact that Friends do 
not believe in the resurrection of the body. But they have not 
been slow in cherishing the memory of their dead in other ways, 
as their extensive memorial literature bears witness. 

- This becomes evident when we take into consideration the large 
number of men who voluntarily confessed to the monthly meeting 
that they had had improper relations with their wives before mar- 
riage. It sometimes happened that the women first came forward 
to make confession. We find from time to time in the records of 

Southern Friends an entrj' of this kind : *' offered a paper 

condemning his conduct in having carnal knowledge of her that is 
now his wife before marriage which was read and received." This 
epidemic of looseness reminds us of a similar state of affairs in 
colonial Massachusetts. 1761-1775. Here the abbreviations " C. F. " 
— confessed to fornication — were well known in the records, and Mr. 
Charles Francis Adams, in discussing tlie subject (Proceedings Mass. 
Hist. Society, 1891), finds the compelling cause of confession to be 
" the parents' desire to secure baptism for their offspring during a 
period when bai)tifim was believed to be essential to salvation, with 
the Calvinistic hell as an alternative." In the case of Friends we 
have found no compelling cause except a literal interpretation of 
the scriptural jjassage. 



Quaker Social Life. 133 

exhorted in a brotherly way, lest the " enemy might draw 
and vail his understanding and bring darkness over his 
understanding." And had two Friends quarreled, they ex- 
pressed the idea in Anglo-Saxon terseness : " the Devil who 
is our Great Enemie has crept in between said " Friends. 

The disposition of Quakers to segregate themselves from 
the people among whom they lived tended to make them 
distinctively an iinperuun in hnperio. This distinction and 
separation was brought out by their dress, speech, religious 
services, marriage ceremony, opposition to oaths, and par- 
ticularly by their position with reference to courts of law. 
Friends might go to law with one who had been disowned, 
but to take a Friend into court required first the agreement 
of the meeting, and, in case of disobedience, the Society did 
more than rebuke; it sometimes required a disorderly mem- 
ber to " bring a paper of his condemnation to the next 
monthly meeting, and also publish it at the court-house door 
in full of all he hath done." The Society did not hesitate to 
enforce its dictum, " swear not at all," even if it was neces- 
sary to disown the refractory member. 

Some of the members were men of distinction in the So- 
ciety at large; they wrote and received letters from Friends 
abroad. Perhaps the first North Carolinian to go on a re- 
ligious visit to other parts was Gabriel Newby, who went to 
Pennsylvania and the Jerseys in 1701. He went again in 
1 71 5. Matthew Pritchett, also of North Carolina, was with 
him.' James Bates, a public Friend of Virginia, visited 
England and Ireland about 171 7.' 

Henry White, of North Carolina, " was a minister of the 
gospel and a faithful Friend, whose christian conduct and 
loving behavior towards the Indians, who were numerous in 
these parts at that time, was such, as we have been credibly 
informed, not only procured him great esteem and respect 
from them, but for his sake they showed great love and ten- 
derness towards others in the infant settlement of these 



' Bowden, II., 232. ' Chalkley's Journal, 192. 



134 Soiitlivrn (Jtiakcr.'i and Hlaccri/. 

parts. He dwelt in Pasquotank County, and died 3d of 8th 
month, 1712, aged about seventy seven years." ^ 

Daniel Akehurst, a public I'tilmkI wlio came over to North 
Carolina in 1681 as the deputy of John Archdale, has been 
mentioned already. Joseph Glaister was another Carolina 
Friend who was well known. He was a native of Cvmiber- 
land, England, and was bom there in 1673. ^^ was con- 
verted in 1692, and at twenty-one began to preach. He 
traveled in England and Scotland, and in 1605 ^^s in Ire- 
land. He visited America, but returned to England : he was 
in Ireland in 1704,' and in the same year traveled with Chalk- 
ley on Long Island and in Xew England. He removed his 
family to America and settled in Pasquotank County, N. C, 
about 1709. He died there 31st of nth month, 1718(19). 
His wife, Mary, died 5th of 6th month, 1740. He was a 
gifted man in the ministry and excellent in discipline and 
church afifairs.' 

William Matthews was a Virginia Friend of prominence. 
He was born in Stafford County, Va., in 1732, and much of 
his time was spent in religious labors. He visited most of 
the meetings in America, and spent several years in the work 
of the ministry in England, Ireland, Scotland and Wales.' 

The Jordan, Ladd, Pleasants and Stabler families were 
prominent in the Society in Virginia and furnished several 
valuable ministers. Joseph Jordan (1695-1735) was born in 
Xansemond County, Va. He became a minister, labored 
in Virginia and the adjacent provinces, and visited most parts 
of England, Ireland and divers parts of Holland.'' 

Robert Jordan (1693-1742), the elder brother of Joseph, 
was also a man of much prominence in the Society. His 
first religious visit was to ^Tar3dand. He often traveled in 
\'irginia and Carolina in the service of truth when young. 

H'lillection of MemorialH, Phila., 1787, pp. 41, 42, from Noith 
Carolina Yearly- Meeting. 

' Wight's Quakers in Ireland, SHS, 855. 

' MS. Records, aud Memorials, Pliiladeljjlna, 1787, 56-58. 

••Janney, III.. 398. 

'"Memorials, Piiila.. 1787. 99-103, from Virginia Yearly IMeeting. 



Quaker Hocial Life. 185 

In 1722 he went to New England. He suffered for his tes- 
timony on account of militia laws and church rates. His 
experience with the latter will be given in a later chapter. 
In 1728 he embarked for Great Britain with Samuel Bownas; 
visited the meetings of Friends in England, Scotland, Wales 
and Ireland, then proceeded to Barbadoes, and returned to 
Virginia in 1730. In the same year he visited as far east- 
ward as Rhode Island. He removed to Philadelphia in 
1732; was in Great Britain again in 1734, and within the 
next four years visited the Southern colonies, going as far as 
South Carolina and Georgia.^ 

Another valuable member of this family was Richard Jor- 
dan, born at Elizabeth, Norfolk County, Va., Dec. 19, 1756; 
died at Newton, N. J., Oct. 13, 1826. He was the son of 
Joseph and Patience Jordan, who were both Quakers and 
trained their children in this profession. They removed 
about 1768 to Northampton County, N. C, and settled in 
the Quaker community of Rich Square. Here young 
Richard was thrown more into the society of Friends than 
he had been in Virginia. He married and settled in North 
Carolina. He began to preach when about twenty-five 
years of age, and being interested in the manumission of 
slaves attended the sessions of the North Carolina Assembly 
several times between 1790 and 1797 in their behalf. His 
first travels were in North Carolina and Virginia .on the 
same account. In 1797-98 he visited the meetings in Vir- 
ginia, Maryland, and northwards as far as Massachusetts; he 
was absent on this journey eleven months; traveled 3,000 
miles and reported good services. In 1799 he felt himself 
under a concern to pay a religious visit to Friends in 
Europe, and after again visiting most of the meetings in 
North Carolina, Virginia, Maryland and Pennsylvania on 
his way, sailed from New York in INlarch, 1800. He trav- 
eled in England, Scotland, Wales and Ireland; crossed to 
the Continent, traveled in Germany, and went by land to 

^ Memorials^ pp. 109-118. 



136 tioutheni (Jinikcrs and Slavery. 

riolland, to what is now lielgfiuni, and through France, re- 
turning to England via Bordeaux. He reports that they 
were everywhere treated with a courteous consideration. 
" Thus it often appears to nie that we make our way better 
in tlie minds of people, when we keep strictly to our religious 
profession, in all countries and amongst all sorts of per- 
sons." He landed in Philadelphia on his return, October 28, 
1802, and writes: "I was from home on this journey three 
years, one month and ten days, in which time I traveled by 
land and water, about 15,000 miles." He continued the 
work of a traveling minister, and writes in 1807: "I have 
now attended all the yearly meetings for discipline in the 
world, and some of them several times over." In 1804 he 
removed with his family from North Carolina to Hartford, 
Conn., and in 1809 removed to Newton, N. J., where he 
died. His journal is largely in the form of a diary, and 
shows all the marks of the Quaker character, naive, simple, 
but highly figurative, with a certain flavor of self-conceit.' 
A prominent Friend in the early history of Tennessee was 
Isaac Hammer. He was born near Philadelphia, April 8, 
1769. His parents removed with him to Tennessee about 
1783. He was at first a Methodist preacher, then a Dunk- 
ard preacher, but became a Quaker about 1808. He visited 
Ohio in 181 1; traveled within the limits of North Carolina 
and Virginia Yearly ^Meetings in 1816, including the weaker 
meetings in South Carolina and the older meetings in Vir- 
ginia. He was in Virginia, Maryland and Pennsylvania in 
1818; visited Ohio and Indiana in 1821, New York and New 
England, 1822. In 1826-27 he visited England, Holland, 
Westphalia, Wiirtcmbcrg, Austria. Baden, Switzerland and 
France. After returning to America he renewed his travels 



'It is printed in Friends'' Librari/, XIII., Philadelphia. 1849, pp. 
292-349. A separate edition \h as follows : A Journal of the Life 
and Religious Labours of Richard Jordan, a Minister of the Gospel 
in the Society of Friends, late of Newton, in Gloucester County, 
New Jersey [three lines (juotation] Philadelphia. Thomas Kite, 
1829, 12ino, pp. 172. See also a biographical memoir i)ublished in 
Philadelphia, 1«27. 



Quaker Social Ijife. 137 

and died in Tennessee, Oct, 14, 1835. He has left a manu- 
script journal, which is preserved among the archives of the 
Society at Guilford College. 

William Hunt was born in Pennsylvania about 1733. His 
parents removed to Guilford County, N. C. His maturer 
years were spent in North Carolina. His travels in the ser- 
vice of the gospel began at twenty; he visited all the Ameri- 
can provinces and nearly all the meetings they contained. 
His first travels were probably, and his second were cer- 
tainly, in Virginia and North Carolina. In 1755 he visited 
the settlements of Friends in South Carolina. These were 
scattered and required him from time to time to spend a 
night in the woods. In 1761 he left home in company with 
Bowater Beales to visit Friends in Virginia, Maryland, Penn- 
sylvania and New Jersey, and six years later we find him 
again visiting these provinces and extending his work still 
farther into New York and New England, his companion 
on the former part of the journey being Zachariah Dicks, 
from the same section of North Carolina. They went as far 
east as the present State of Maine. He was again in New 
England in 1768. In 1770, in company with Thomas Thorn- 
burgh, his nephew, he visited Europe. They set out from 
New Garden in November, 1770; visited the meetings in 
eastern North Carolina, again visited meetings as far north 
as Massachusetts, and set sail from Philadelphia in May, 
1771. He visited meetings in England and Scotland, went 
to Dublin and passed into Holland. On his return from the 
Continent he was taken with smallpox and died at New- 
castle-upon-Tyne, September 9, 1772. He was a cousin of 
John Woolman. Like him, he was deeply interested in the 
negro and much opposed to slavery.^ 

Nathan Hunt was the son of William Hunt, and was born 
within the verge of New Garden Monthly Meeting, Guilford 

' Memoirs of William Hunt by Enoch Lewis, based on his journals 
and letters. In the sketch of Hunt given in Janney, IH.. 326-827, 
it is stated that he was born on Monocacy, Frederick County, Mary- 
land. This is not at all improbable. 



138 Sdullicni (^hnikcrs and Slttrcri/. 

County, X. C, October 26, 1758. He married at twenty, 
but did not become a minister until 1792. The next four 
years were spent in ministrations among the local meetings. 
His first extended visit was to the meetings in South Caro- 
lina and Georgia in 1797. The next year he visited meet- 
ings in Tennessee, and in 1798 the Northern and Eastern 
States. The next few years were spent in work at home; 
in 1804 and 1805 he was again in the Northern, Eastern and 
Middle States, and again in i8io and 181 1, when he visited 
some Indian tribes in Canada. He visited England, Scot- 
land and Ireland in 1820-21. He extended his visits to the 
newer meetings in Ohio and Indiana in 1832, and from this 
time was able to travel little. He died at Centre, Guil- 
ford County, N. C, August 8, 1853. He was an ardent ad- 
mirer of proper and useful education and was liberal in the 
support of schools. He took a deep interest from the first 
in the establishment and maintenance of the New Garden 
Boarding School, which has since become Guilford College. 
Like the most of his contemporaries in prc-revolutionary 
North Carolina, the principal i)art of the learning he had was 
obtained by the light of a pine-knot on the hearth after the 
day's work was done.' 

I'n fortunately we know ver}^ little of Jeremiah Hubbard. 
He was a contem])orary of Nathan Hunt, and was born, I 
believe, in Caswell County, N. C. He was a minister of the 
Society and the most learned and eloquent of his genera- 
tion. He was one-fourth Indian, and with two Cherokee 
chiefs visited President Jackson with the request that no 
spirituous liquors be sold in the Indian Territory. Jackson 
granted the request, and it afterwards proved the salvation 
of the Territory. As an educator Hu1)bard was second only 
to Dr. David Caldwell.' He had a school at New Garden, 
and was instrumental in founding the T)Oarding School 
there. 



' Bnef Memoir of Nathan Hunt : chiefly extracted from his jour- 
nals and letters. 

*8ee C. F. Toinlinson's article on N. C Manumission Society, in 
N. a. Uitiversit!/ Magazine, XIV. (1894-95), 231-227. 



Quaker Social Life. 139 

A younger contemporary of Nathan Hunt and Jeremiah 
Hubbard, and one whose hfe connects the past with the 
present generation, was Nereus Mendenhall. He was born 
Aug. 14, 1 819, and was descended from one of the oldest 
Quaker famihes in the New Garden section of North Caro- 
Hna. He learned the printer's trade with Lyndon Swaim; 
was graduated at Haverford, and became principal of New 
Garden Boarding School. After taking the degree of M. D. 
at Jefferson College, Philadelphia, in 1845, he again taught 
in the Boarding School. He then became a civil engineer 
and was engaged on the survey of the North Carolina Rail- 
road. He was an abolitionist, and was summoned before a 
justice for distributing Helper's Impending Crisis. He was 
connected with the Boarding School during the war and was 
a strong Union man. After its close he acted with the Con- 
servatives; was twice in the State Legislature, and was Demo- 
cratic candidate for superintendent of public instruction in 
1872. He afterwards taught in the Penn Charter School of 
Philadelphia and at Haverford, where he also acted as super- 
intendent. His last years were spent at New Garden, N. C, 
where he died, Oct. 29, 1893. He was a deep thinker and a 
nian of weight and influence in that section of the State.' 

The names given above are mostly those of ministers who 
traveled and preached. Some of them kept valuable journals. 
There are others who deserve notice for the literary work 
which they did. This work is very crude, and most of it is 
valueless to us, but it is doubtless as good as the similar 
productions of Friends and Puritans, and it shows (and this 
is the point of main interest to us) that Southern Friends, 
although far from the intellectual center of the Society, and 
laboring under many educational disadvantages, were not 
idle. And it probably represents a greater literary output 
during the eighteenth century than any other denomination 
in these States, with the possible exception of the Presby- 
terians. Nor were they indifferent to books in general. 

'See sketch by Mrs. Mary Mendenhall Hobbs,in Guilford Collegian. 
VI., 57 63, 93-105 (1893), with portrait. 



140 Southern Quakers and Slavery. 

The Yearly Meetinf^^s of London and Philadelphia sent down 
books and tracts from time to time to be distributed. In 
1760 we have the complaint that Friends have been too 
" careless and negligent " in dispensing these books. But 
that this was not always the case is shown by the proposi- 
tion to send to Europe for a quantity of Barclay's Apology. 
In 1764 thirty-eight subscriptions for a new edition of Fox's 
Journal, with Penn's Introduction, were given in North 
Carolina. 

The first committee to oversee the press — a Quaker Index 
Expurgatorius — in North Carolina was appointed in 1755, 
when it was advised " that no Friend or Friends, write, print 
or publish any Book or writeing whatsoever tending to 
raise Contention or Breech of Unity amongst Friends or that 
have not first had the perusal & approbation of Such friends 
as shall be appointed by this fleeting for that afifair." 
Samuel and James Newby, Thomas Nicholson, John and 
Phineas Nixon, Josiah Bundy and Joseph Robinson w-ere 
appointed " to peruse all such Books & writeings as shall be 
offered them." This committee was changed from time to 
time, but was a regular part of Quaker economy. The ten- 
dency of this committee was to narrow the limits of thought, 
to take away that wide freedom which the early Quaker 
enjoyed, and to make a sect out of the Society. 

South Carolina leads the list of writers on controversial 
and religious subjects, and so far as I have learned there were 
no other South Carolina Quaker authors. This one was 
Sophia Ilumc ( r. 1701 -1774). She was a native of South 
Carolina and a grandtlaughter of William Baily and Mar}' 
Fisher. The latter was one of the first to preach Quakerism 
in New England. Sophia was not reared a Friend, l>ut was 
convinced of Friends' j)rinciplcs and removed from South 
Carolina to London. About 1747 she revisited South Caro- 
lina and traveled north to Philadelphia.' She was again in 
South Carolina in 1767-68. She ]ni])lished: An Exhorta- 

' Piety Promoted, Kendal's ed., IX., 15. 



Quaker Social Life. 141 

tion to the Inhabitants of the Province of South CaroHna 
(Philadelphia, 1748; London, 1752, etc., 8°, pp. 152); An 
Epistle to the Inhabitants of South Carolina; containing 
Sundry Observations proper to be considered by every Por- 
fessor of CJiristianitym general (London, 1754, 8°, pp. 114); 
A Short Appeal to Men and Women of Reason (Bristol, 
1765, 8°, pp. 35, i); A Caution to such as Observe Days 
and Times (London, 1766, 8°, pp. 39). 

Another of these early authors was Thomas Nicholson, 
who was born in Perquimans County, N. C, about 171 5. 
Fortunately his journal has come down to us in the original 
manuscript. It is not a continuous record of his life, but is 
a narrative of the three principal journeys he made in the ser- 
vice of truth, and contains also some of his minor writings. 
His first trip was in 1746, and was made along with other 
Friends from Perquimans County to the Cape Fear section 
to settle things among Friends there. His words suggest 
that his committee might have been sent down to settle a 
monthly meeting at Carv^er's Creek. He also visited the 
meeting at Dunn's Creek and those about Newbem and in 
Carteret County. He says that Gov. Gabriel Johnston was 
" loving " to Friends and returned thanks for their visit 
to him. 

But Thomas Nicholson's most important service was the 
trip which he made to England, 1749-51. He left home in 
May, 1749, and got back in January, 1751. Between July, 
1749, and September, 1750, he was engaged in visiting the 
meetings in England. He rode on horseback during these 
journeys between 2,500 and 3,000 miles; he preached almost 
every day; visited most, if not all, of the meetings; was in all 
parts of the country, and his ministry was attended vrith 
many manifestations of the Spirit. He did not go into 
Wales, Scotland or Ireland. While in London he visited 
Lord Granville, who still retained large landed interests in 
North Carolina. At their parting Lord Granville expressed 
his good wishes for him and for Friends in America, saying 
he was pleased so many Friends were tenants under him. 



14:2 X()iit}tcrii (JiKikvis and Slarcry. 

Nicholson landed in Boston on his rctiini home in Decem- 
ber, 1750, and visited the meetings on his overland journey 
to the South. 

In 1 77 1 he was one of a committee to present a petition to 
the Assembly, and again visited the meetings in the vicinity 
of Newbem. He died, probably in Perquimans County, 
N. C, March 4, 1780. In 1782 we find that subscriptions 
were taken in the North Carolina meetings for the proposed 
publication of his journal. This was never done. The 
manuscript is in possession of Philadelphia Yearly Meeting. 

His principal writings, so far as known, are: An Answer 
to the Layman's Treatise on Baptism (Williamsburg, Va., 
1757- 8°); An Epistle to Friends in Great Britain (1762). 

In 1774 he presented to the Yearly Meeting a "small 
piece of MS." entitled " The Light upon the Candlestick." 
It was examined, approved and a committee appointed to 
assist in making it public' He also presented a paper on 
" Liberty and Property." This was an argument in favor of 
altering the law in regard to the freeing of slaves. He was 
an ardent champion of emancipation. A committee was 
appointed to bring this paper to the attention of the mem- 
bers of Assembly. I do not know that it was ever printed.' 

Another Quaker author was Bamaby Nixon, of Perqui- 
mans County, N. C. He was born about the first month, 
1752. He led a life of self-denial, zeal and persevering in- 
tegrity. He wholly declined the use of flesh as food. He 
advocated the manumission of slaves, and was engaged in 
the important struggle in their behalf in Perquimans and 
Pasquotank counties in 1777-78. He married Sarah Hun- 
nicutt about 1778, and settled near Burleigh meeting, in 
Prince George County, Va. His interest in the negro con- 
tinued, and about 1805 he made a serious address to the 
people of Virginia on slaver}'. He died, February 13, 1807. 

' In the appendix to the second volume of Sewel's Histartf there 
is ii piece of this name. Were they the same V 

' See some notes on his career, wliich liad lieen jiropart'd bv Jolm 
Peinberton (d. r. 1794). in The Friend. XVII.. 1848-44. 404, 413; 
XVIII.. 1844-45, 4, 13, 21. See also his MS. Journal. 



Quaker Social Life. 143 

A part of his manuscripts are still in possession of Baltimore 
Yearly Meeting. His published papers appeared post- 
humously: Extracts from the Manuscript Writings of Bar- 
naby Nixon (Richmond, Va., 1814, sm. 8°); reprinted under 
the title Biographical and other Extracts from the Manu- 
script Writings of Barnaby Nixon (York, 1822, sm. 8°). 

In 1807 Thomas Hollowell, of North Carolina, presented 
a " piece of MS." to the North Carolina Yearly Meeting, 
which was examined and passed upon; it was ordered that 
from 500 to 1,000 copies be printed. We do not know its 
character.^ 

Some efforts toward education were made by Friends in 
colonial North Carolina. It does not seem that they were 
extensive or long continued. The first difficulty to be over- 
come was the need of books. In 1743 North Carolina 
Friends in Perquimans and Pasquotank counties, " for the 
benefit of teaching young children and others," wished to 
send to Boston to have Fox's Primmers [sic'] reprinted. 
Robert Wilson, Thomas Nicholson and Joseph Robinson 
were appointed a committee to edit the primers, /. r. "to 
Collect out of those primmers Such a part of them as shall 
be Suitable for young persons that are just entering upon 
Learning," and that each monthly meeting " raize a Sum of 
money According to each mans Liberallity for y' purpose." 
But these efforts met with small success. 

Robert Pleasants, in a letter to Samuel Fothergill, men- 
tions a scheme which was on foot to promote education in 
Virginia in 1759, but nothing came of it. The South River 
Alonthly Meeting seems to have led in this work later. It 
reported progress in 1783, and in 1 788 said that schools were 
set up as far as circumstances would allow. In 1784 it was 
the sense and judgment of the Yearly Meeting of Virginia 
" that Friends endeavor to have suitable schools, kept by 

' I have purposely omitted from this list all men like "Warner 
Mifflin. William Williams, Charles Osboru, Elijah Coffin, Levi 
Coffin, Elisha Bates, who, though born in these States, left them at 
an early age and did most of their work in other States. Samuel M. 
Jauuey has been mentioned elsewhere. 



144 Southern (Junkers and Slavery. 

Friends under the inspection of fit persons chosen for the 
purpose." The first school opened under the Yearly Meet- 
ing plan, so far as I have been able to learn, was that of the 
Cedar Creek meeting in 1791. The proceedings of the 
Cedar Creek School Company have been preser\^ed. The 
school seems to have prospered during 1791 and 1792. Then 
there was trouble in securing a proper teacher and in col- 
lecting subscriptions. In 1799 it was discontinued because 
of the small number of Friends' children in attendance and 
because the original intention of the school had not been 
fulfilled. In 1805 there was a school at Gravelly Hill under 
care of White Oak Swamp Monthly Meeting. It existed 
longer and seems to have been comparatively successful. 
y' There was always considerable discussion concerning the 
education of the negro, and constant complaints appear in 
the records that it was " too much neglected," but this talk 
does not seem to have taken any practical form, and could 
hardly do so under the severe laws of the States against 
negro education. 



CHAPTER VII. 
Quakers and the Established Church. 

No religious denomination has stood out more unbend- 
ingly for the right of freedom of worship than the Society of 
Friends. Organized during the decline of Puritanism, they 
were made to feel the full weight of the royalist and ecclesi- 
astical reaction; persecuted all the time, they had never 
ceased to demand freedom of worship for themselves, and 
have seldom failed to recognize it as an inalienable right in 
others. 

The American colonies partook of the civil and ecclesias- 
tical reaction that marks the close of the seventeenth and 
beginning of the eighteenth century. There had been an 
Establishment in Virginia for many years and the Church 
party was strong. From the records of Henrico County we 
find that the Virginians after the Revolution of 1688 took 
certain steps that look much like an effort to restrain the 
greater religious freedom of the Quakers, but which were in 
reality a military move and were intended to protect Vir- 
ginia from the spying of Frenchmen, with whom England 
was then at war. An order of the authorities of Henrico 
County in April, 1692,^ after noting the danger of an incur- 
sion of the French into Pennsylvania, recites: " it being con- 
sidered that at ye frequent Meeting of ye Quakers in Several 
places in this Colony of their own appointing without ever 
acquainting the Governmt with ye same or doing what is 
required by " the Toleration Act, and noting also that " not 
only ye Inhabitants of this Colony, but those of Maryland, 
Pensilvania and other places are usually present By means 
whereof the French or Indians if possessed of Pensilvania 
have fitt opportunity of knowing the afifairs of this their 

' Record Book of Henrico County, p. 92. 



1-4(1 So)it}icrn (^uabrs and >ihivery. 

Ma"^-" Govemnu or ordering- them selves to do mischief 
accordingly for preventing whereof for ye future and to the 
end that the aforesaid Act of Parliament may be putt into 
Effective Execution, It is ordered that after publication 
thereof (\v^"^ all their Ma^'*^^ Justices of ye peace in their re- 
spective Counties in this Colony are required to Cause to 
be done at ye next Court to be held for their said Counties). 
'■ That none of ye persons usually Called Quakers do pre- 
sume to meet at any place whatso ever w^^out first doing & 
performing what by ye before recited Act of Parliament is 
required & conmiandcd upon Penalty of being presented 
& suffering such pains & penalties as by ye said Act are to 
be inflicted on those who do not comply. And to the End 
the s*^ Act may be duly performed all their ma^'^^ Justices of 
the Peace Sherr^^ & others their ma^^®** officers whatsoever, 
are hereby required & Commanded to take Care that noe 
person or perssons whatever presume to doc an Act anything 
Contrary to ye true intent & meaning thereof. And it is 
further ordered, That if ye s^ prssons Called Quakers have 
performed what is required by ye aforesaid Act of Parlia- 
ment any Stranger from any other Governm^ shall come 
among them they shall give an acct of every such prsson to 
ye next Justis of ye peace who is hereby ordered to cause 
ye s'^ prsson to appear before them and to take his or their 
Examination under his or their hands to what place he or 
they belong whether going & when & of all things else, 
which may be for their ma^'®^ Service & forthwith return 
the same (if he see Case to ye R*^ hon^'^ Francis Nicholson 
Esq their ma"*"** Lt Govern'" that such further orders may be 
had therein as shall be agreeable to the Law; and it is also 
ordered that if any prsson whatever shall receive by letter, or 
hear any strange news which may tend to ye disturbance of 
ye peace of this Governm* that they doe presume to publish 
ye same but w*^^ ye first Convenience repair to ye next Justice 
of ye peace & acquaint him therew^'' who is to act therein 
acc<jrfling t(j law." 



Quakers and the Established Church. 147 

In accord with this new legal requirement we find that on 
October 12, 1692, " John Pleasants, in behalf of himself and 
other Quakers, did this day, in open court p'sent ye follow- 
ing Acc't of ye Quaker places of public rneeting in this 
county, viz: At our Public Meeting House, p [per] Thomas 
Holmes [presumed to be the minister] ; Att Mary Maddox's, 
a monthly meeting; Att John Pleasants'."^ These as places 
of worship are directed to be committed to record as the act 
of Parliament enjoined." 

It does not appear that Friends in North Carolina regis- 
tered their meeting-houses before 1758, and it never became 
a common practice there. 

On April i, 1700, the county court of Henrico, in answer 
to an order for information from Gov. Nicholson concerning 
the various bodies of religious Dissenters in the county, 
" how long they have been kept, how lycensed, how many 
and what persons resort thereto," etc., mention no Dissent- 
ers besides Quakers, and say there was one meeting-house in 
the county near Thomas Holmes', " to which place several 
persons deemed Quakers doe Resort upon Sunday & Thurs- 
day in Every week under pretence of Religious worship, but 
have no constant preacher. Except Mrs. Jane Pleasants 
(widow) whose qualification & Lycence we know not we are 
also informed that of late there have been monthly meetings, 

' Pleasants was the ancestor of the Virginia family of that name. 
Some of its members are still Quakers. His will is dated Oct. 1, 
1690 : " I give, grant, and bequeath unto friends in these parts, 
called Quaquers — (which now are or hei'eafter may be) that small 
parcell of land by me purchased of Benjamin Hatcher, joyning 
upon Thos. Holmes' land, for a meeting house and burying place — 
with the meeting house now upon it, and ye laud purchased afore- 
said I doe give, devise, and bequeathe unto friends abovesaid 
called Quakers, for the worship and service of God forever." — Hen- 
rico County Records. 1688-1699, p. 154. 

2 Henrico County Records. 1688-1697, p. 353 ; see also R. A. Brock, 
in Southern Historical Society Papers, XIX. , 129. Foote, SketcJies, 
I., 51-52, says that Francis Makamie was the first Dissenter licensed 
in Virginia, 1699 ; but Dr. H. R. Mcllwaine has recently shown that 
Josias Mackie was licensed to preach by Norfolk County Court, 
June 22, 1692. The Presbyterians thus antedate the Quakers by 
three months. 



148 Southern Quakers and Slavery. 

kept (by these persons deemed Quakers) at ye house of Wil- 
Ham Porter Jun'' in the County, and that several Wandering 
Strangers Come here as Preachers, and upon pretense of 
Rehgion, Resort to the two meeting places." 

Their strength in Henrico can be better appreciated when 
we learn that as early as the 3d of March, 1700, it was agreed 
that John Pleasants build a new meeting-house, 30 x 70 feet, 
instead of repairing the old one. 

There are no such prominent episodes in the history of 
the struggle of Quakerism against the Establishment in Vir- 
ginia as we shall see further on enlivened the monotonous 
annals of the Carolinas. There are various reasons for this. 
The Establishment there was older, richer, stronger than in 
either of the Carolinas, and Quakers were always weak in 
Virginia in comparison with the numbers of the Established 
Church. In Mrginia Quakers did not undertake to over- 
throw the Established Church as they did in North Carolina, 
but devoted their energies instead to securing such exemp- 
tions from the payment of tithes and military fines as were 
possible, in bearing testimony against these and in exhort- 
ing their members to be faithful. 

As far as concerns Virginia, we have only to trace the 
church acts as they influenced the Friends to show what 
their position in regard to these acts was, what tlicir suffer- 
ings were, and how their legal status was altered by the Bill 
of Rights and later legislation. 

The law of 1663, although severe against Friends, had not 
always been enforced, as we have seen. It seems to have 
been left largely to the caprice of the high sheriff of the sep- 
arate counties, whose duty it was to enforce it. and this was 
mild or severe according to the individual greed for the in- 
former's share of the fines. In 1680 the A'irginia Assembly 
passed an act prohibiting unlawful disturbances of divine 
worship "by words, or any otlier manner or means whatso- 
ever," and any person who " shall there appear in any un- 
seemly or indecent gesture " was to be put " under restraint 
during rlivinc service." Such ofifcndcrs were to be fined 200 



Quakers and the Estahlished Church. 149 

pounds of tobacco and cask for the first offense, and for 
every subsequent offense the fine was fixed at 500 pounds of 
tobacco and cask/ 

This law was aimed against what we have seen to have 
been a characteristic development of the seventeenth century. 
In Virginia it probably affected the Quakers more than any 
others, but as it was aimed at unjustifiable interference with 
regular worship, no exception can be taken to it. 

In 1696 a new law for the support of the clergy of the Es- 
tablished Church was passed. It fixed their salary at 16,000 
pounds of tobacco, besides their lawful perquisites; collec- 
tors were appointed in each district, who could levy by dis- 
tress. The vestries were empowered to purchase glebes at 
the expense of the parish and to erect a convenient dwelling- 
house for the minister." 

It does not seem that the Toleration Act of William and 
Mary, passed May 24, 1689, received any formal statutory 
recognition in Virginia earlier than 1699, although Mr. 
Brock has shown that the Quakers had obtained practical 
recognition of their rights under it as early as 1692. In 
1699 it was provided in a law " for the more effectual sup- 
pressing of blasphemy, swearing, cursing, drunkenness and 
Sabbath breaking," ' that all Protestant Dissenters, who were 
qualified according to the terms of the Toleration Act, were 
to be exempted from the penalty of 5s. or 50 pounds of 
tobacco inflicted by the Virginia law on all persons twenty- 
one years of age who " neglect or refuse to resort to their 
parish church or chapel once in two months to hear divine 
service upon the Sabbath day." But that this was toleration 
in name rather than in reality is pointed out clearly by Hen- 
ing, who calls attention to the fact that "nothing could be 
more intolerant than to impose the penalties, by this act pre- 
scribed, for not repairing to church, and then to hold out the 
idea of exemption by compliance with the provisions of such 



■Hening, II.,483. 

^Ihid., III., 151. This law, with various modifications, is the 
basis of all the Church legislation up to the Revolution. 
Uhid., III., 168 ; see also 360, V., 226. 



150 Southern Quakers and Slavery. 

a law as the statute of i William and Aviary, adopted by a 
mere general reference, when not one person in a thousand 
could possibly know its contents." 

Friends were careful in both colonies to make their protest 
against payment to the Establishment in any form. The 
\'irginia Yearly Meeting of 1707 issued exhortations to 
members to be faithful in the testimony against tithes 
" either for themselves or servants and that the monthly 
meeting do deal with such offending persons in the power 
of truth." They were equally careful that the record of their 
suflferings be preserved. In the first month, 1701, George 
Norsworthy, high sheriff of Nansemond County, had taken 
by distress from Margaret Jordan 125 pounds of tobacco for 
" priests dews," and the year before 530 pounds. Robert 
Jordan had lost 200 pounds in 1700 for the same cause, and 
300 more in 1702. There is a record of but 35 pounds 
taken in 1703 and 179 in 1704. There is then a break until 
1717. 

The next law relating to the Establishment was passed in 
1727.' It provided for the payment of the clergy, etc., but 
there was no exemption for Dissenters. There was, how- 
ever, a case in 1705 wiien the " French refugees, inhabiting 
at the Manakin Town, and the parts adjacent," were ex- 
empted from the payment of "publick and county levys." 
This exemption was to extend over a period of three years." 
But it is clear that it was not made on religious grounds, but 
was for their " encouragement," and was more comprehen- 
sive than exemption from priest's dues. 

In 1730 certain German Protestants living in Stafford 
County were exempted from the payment of " parish levies." ' 
It is probable that this exemption was of the same sort as 
that of the French refugees and was not especially religious 
in character, because parish dues were used for other things 
than church afifairs. They w^ent for the general expenses of 
the parish, for the poor, etc. 

'Hening, IV..204. 'JWrf., III., 478. »7/m/., IV., 306. 



Quakers and the Estahllshcd Church. 151 

As early as 1701 the Yearly Meeting of Virginia ordered 
" that every monthly meeting doe appoynt on friend or more 
as nead may bee to goe to ye vestry at a sett time and thear 
to endeavor to bee Informed what Tobb is levied on euery 
Tithable in the parish for the Priests demands & Church 
Rates so Called & soe to make Report of to the meeting 
before the ofificers goe About to gather their demands that 
such friends as Can not for Concience sake pay the Priests 
dews & other Church demands may know what to keep back 
on that ace*." 

There were cases of suffering because of this refusal. One 
of the most noteworthy is that of Robert Jordan. He was 
sued in the beginning of 1723 for priest's wages. He re- 
fused to comply with the demand, and offered to the magis- 
trates in writing sundry considerations in his own defense. 
This action was taken amiss; he was indicted by the grand 
jury and summoned before the Governor and Council. He 
pleaded in his own behalf that the case could not come up 
for trial unless it was brought within three months of the 
commission of the offense, and it had been seven months; 
but the trial was continued nevertheless, and he was sen- 
tenced to a year's imprisonment, or bonds with security, etc. 

" Being committed to prison, I was first placed in the 
debtors' apartment, but in a few days was removed into the 
common side, where condemned persons are kept, and for 
some time had not the privilege of seeing anybody, except a 
negro who once a day brought water to the prisoners; this 
place was so dark that I could not see to read even at noon, 
without creeping to small holes in the door; being also very 
noisome, the infectious air brought on me the flux, that, had 
not the Lord been pleased to sustain me by his invisible 
hand, I had there lost my life; the governor was made ac- 
quainted with my condition, and I believe used his en- 
deavors for my liberty: the commissary visited me more than 
once under a show of friendship, but with a view to ensnare 
me, and I was very weary of him. I wrote again to the gov- 
ernor, to acquaint him of my situation; for so after a con- 



1.52 Southern (Judbrs and Slavery. 

finement of three weeks, I was discharged, without any ac- 
knowledgment of coniphance, and this brought me into an 
acquaintance, and ready admittance to the governor, who 
said I was a meek man," etc. 

In 1725 "a mahcious person getting into his possession 
the judgment obtained against him for the demand of tithes 
before mentioned, had seven of his cattle seized and ap- 
praised, but deferred taking them away until about two years 
after, when he procured a new action against him, alleging, 
but not proving, that Robert had converted at least a part of 
them to his own use, and so managed the matter in his ab- 
sence as to make the debt amount to twenty pounds, tho' 
the demand was but eight pounds, and serving the execution 
on his body, he was again committed to prison in the twelfth 
month, 1727, where being confined fifteen weeks, he was at 
length discharged, without any person paying anything for 
him, which he would not suffer." ' 

In 1739 Friends protest to the Governor and Assembly 
against these forced payments. They claim for the mem- 
bers of their Society that they are mostly descendants of 
early inhabitants, who have been subject to great losses in 
" substance and employments by annual seizures and dis- 
tresses made on our goods and persons, on the account of 
parish levies." They asked to be relieved of this hardship, 
and thought it was within the power of the authorities to do 
this, as they had been " pleased to bestow the like favor on 
sundry German protestants, by exempting them from parish 
levies." They reminded them that in most British colonies 
they are easy on this either by charter of privileges or 
special laws, and pertinently add : for " we pay all taxes for 
support of government. We transgress no laws of trade, 
we keep back no part of the revenue due to the crown, the 
publick are not charged in the least with our poor, and we 
nevertheless willingly contribute to the public poor and en- 
deavour to follow peace with all men." 

' Memorials, Philadelphia, 1787. Bownas visited Jordan while 
he was in prison and says, ' ' We had a meeting in that prison to good 
satisfaction, many people came to it and were very orderly." 



Quakers and the Established Church. 153 

This petition met with no favorable response, but Friends 
thought in 1742 that distress for tithes would cease, " for the 
men whose business it is to make distress on our goods 
seem to do it with great reluctance." They were to meet 
with disappointment. In 1748 a new Clergy bill was passed. 
It was based on and is essentially the same as that of 1727. 
Some sections are clearer and more direct. The collectors 
were now given power to distrain on " slaves, goods, and 
chattels " of the " person or persons chargeable therewith." ^ 
There is no provision for any class of Dissenters. We are 
to note also that Dissenters were strongest in those counties 
that did not produce good tobacco, for the clergy of the 
Established Church were paid in this, went to the counties 
where the best was grown, and left the poorer counties to 
Dissenters and others. 

The act of 1748 was the last of the three Virginia acts 
having as their distinctive purpose the support of the clergy 
of the EstalDlished Church. The first had been passed in 
1696, the second in 1727; the third lasted until the Revolu- 
tion and the Declaration of Rights. 

Quakers continued to sufifer under its provisions. They 
have preserved a record of these. Unfortunately during 
some of these years the sufiferings for " priest's wages " and 
" church rates " are not dififerentiated from militia fines, and 
for the years just prior to the Revolution the records are 
lost. We have the sufferings for the years 1737-55,* these 
may be taken as an average of the sufferings. They were 
collected by distress; other parish levies were paid without 
hesitation." 

It does not appear that Friends were often imprisoned in 
Virginia because of their religion. Such had been the case 
in the early days of the colony, and occasionally this was re- 

'Hening, VI., 88. 

« Sufferings for " church rates," 1737-1755 :— 1737, £99 lis. lid.; 
1738, £47; 1739. £53 7s. Id.; 1740, £78 10s. 6d.; 1741, £83 16s. lid.; 
1742, £54 10s. lOd.; 1748. £101 7s. 5d.; 1744, £50 4s.; 1745, £54 6s. 
7d.; 1746, £34 4s. 7d.; 1747, £77 Is. 4id., includes also militia 
fines; 1748, £76 18s.; 1750, £16 lis. 5d.; 1755, £43 19s., mostly 
church rates. 



154: l>^(jiitlifni (^fiKiLrrs and Slavery. 

sorted to. Robert Pleasants mentioned a case in his Letter 
Book where IViends were imprisoned as late as 1773 for 
preaching. Unfortunately we have no particulars of this 
case. They were probably soon released, as we find no fur- 
ther mention. 

The next step in the relations between the Society of 
Friends and the State in Virginia is the Bill of Rights 
adopted by the Virginia Convention on the 12th of June. 
1776. Although the Quakers before this time had made re- 
peated efforts to secure recognition from the Establishment 
and to escape from its requirements of church tithes, all their 
efforts had been unsuccessful. It was reserved for the tr\^- 
ing days of the Revolution to snap asunder the bonds of 
Church and State, which in almost every age and country 
have been an evil and a retarding force in the development 
of each. It seems to be true, as Mr. William Wirt Henry 
has asserted in the Papers of the Aincrieaji Historical Asso- 
ciation dl., 23), that at this time the* absolute separation of 
Church and State, although claimed by different sects, had 
been allowed bv no government in the world. To A^irginia, 
then, belongs the great glory of the first recognition of the 
principle that all men have the right to worship God accord- 
ing to the dictates of their own conscience. 

It does not appear that \'irginia Quakers were very 
prominent in the struggle which led up to the adoption of 
the Bill of Rights. In fact, so far as the present writer 
knows, they exercised no influence further than a moral one. 
They were far too small to have much weight in a political 
way; their protests took only the form of patient suffering, 
and we may doubt the efficacy of this method. But Quak- 
ers began the fight; others then built upon the foundations 
which they had laid. Pre-eminently is this true of their 
career in North Carolina, and to a less extent in Virginia. It 
was through the efforts of Baptists and Presbyterians that 
the demand for freedom of religion took definite shape in 
Virginia. This demand was embodied in the sixteenth sec- 
tion of the Virginia Bill of Rights, of which Patrick Henry 
was the author. 



Quakers and the Esfahlished Chureh. 155 

" That religion, or the duty which we owe to our Creator, 
and the manner of discharging it, can be directed only by 
reason and conviction, not by force or violence, and there- 
fore all men are equally entitled to the free exercise of re- 
ligion, according to the dictates of conscience; and that it is 
the mutual duty of all to practice Christian forbearance, 
love, and charity towards each other." ^ 

It appears that at first this was not judged sufficient, for it 
was a question whether the older acts were in force or not. 
In October, 1776, " that equal liberty, as well religious as 
civil, may be universally extended," it was enacted that all 
laws prescribing punishments for " maintaining any opinions 
in matters of religion, forbearing to repair to church or the 
exercising any mode of worship whatsoever," should be re- 
pealed. They were also exempted from " all levies, taxes, 
and impositions " to\vard supporting " the said church, as it 
now is or hereafter may be established, and its ministers."' 

The language of thisi,act indicates that the Legislature had 
not arrived at the conception of a complete divorce of 
Church and State. JefTerson says that at this time two- 
thirds of the Virginians were Dissenters, but the Church 
was not disestablished by it. The salaries of its clergymen, 
however, were suspended and cut off entirely in 1779. The 
question whether there should not be a general assessment 
laid on all for the support of pastors of their choice was re- 
served for future consideration. In 1785 we find the Yearly 
Meeting discussing a bill framed by the Assembly of Octo- 
ber, 1 784, entitled : A bill for establishing a provision for the 

'Hening, IX., 112. The right of Virginia to priority in the mat- 
ter of religious liberty has been disputed by Dr. Charles J. Stille in 
the next volume of the Papers of the American Historical Associa- 
tion (III., 205-311). He argues that a Bill of Rights is not a law, 
or there would have been no necessity for the activity of Jefferson 
in this regard. But Mr. Henry replies to this {Ibid.. 111., 457 et seq.) 
that the Bill of Rights was a law and was so inter{)reted by the 
Virginia Court of Appeals. The trouble was that the Virginia 
Legislature failed to recognize it as such. In theory religious 
liberty was complete, although the law-making body had not yet 
learned to adjust itself to new conditions. 

- Ibid., IX.; 164, 312, 387, 469. 



156 Southern Quakers and Slavery. 

teaching of the Christian rehgion. It provided that Quakers 
and all others might dispose of money collected from them 
for religious purposes to any denomination they thought 
proper. It was published to secure expressions of opinion. 
Friends " signify their intire disapprobation of it; not only 
as it would if passed into a law subject them into sufferings, 
but (as they conceive) be an infringement of religious and 
civil liberty established by the Bill of Rights, and tend to the 
real disadvantage of the community at large." It failed to 
pass.^ 

In the same year, 1784, Jefiferson's famous bill for estab- 
lishing religious freedom was introduced and championed 
by Madison. It met with much opposition and was not 
passed until the next year. In 1799 all laws for the benefit 
of religious societies were repealed, and thus, after a struggle 
of t\vent}'-three years, the Church was disestablished. 

The last phase of the quarrel of the Quakers with the Es- 
tablishment in \"irginia w^as in 1792, "when they complained 
about the employment of a paid chaplain for the Assembly 
while in session. They sent one of their members up to the 
Assembly with a formal protest. The Assembly replied that 
they had too much w^ork to attend to this and suggested that 
the protest be renewed at the beginning of the next Assem- 
bly. Quakers got no relief, and for a number of years the 
answer to one of their queries appears in the regular form 
that no tithes had been paid except such as were paid out of 
the public taxes to support a chaplain. They did not refuse 
to pay the taxes on this account, satisfied themselves with 
this protest, and after a few years the question disappears.^ 

The struggle for religious freedom was not waged by 

' Presbyterians and Baptists also opposed it ; see Foote's Sketches, 
I., 335-345. 

* In contrast to the hostility whicli so frecpientlj- marks the rela- 
tions between Quakers and the Episcopal Oiurch, it is pleasing to 
make note of two exceptions to the peneral rule at least. Stephen 
Grellet records that in 1809 he preached in the Episcopal Church 
in Petersburg after the rector had insistid that he do so. Henry 
Hull held a meeting in the Episcopal Church in Winchester, Va., in 
1799. 



Quakers and the Established Church. 157 

Friends in Virginia, but in North Carolina. It began in 
South Carohna in 1704. We cannot speak accurately as to 
the part played by Quakers there. It was probably small, 
for they do not seem to have ever been very numerous in 
South Carolina. But it is necessary for us to note the move- 
ment there, for it has its counterpart the next year in North 
Carolina, where Quakers were not only prominent, but the 
leading spirits, and throws much light upon those confused 
and harassing events. 

Many of the inhabitants of South Carolina were Dissent- 
ers. The Act of Uniformity had driven many thither,^ and 
promises of religious freedom had also served as an induce- 
ment to migration. The act of 1698, which settled a main- 
tenance on a minister resident in Charleston, created neither 
suspicion nor alarm, for it referred to one man only and he 
was a worthy minister.' Blake and other prominent men 
were Dissenters and they at this time gave aid to the Estab- 
lishment.^ But there was a different view taken of the tend- 
ency of affairs in 1704. In that year the Dissenters had four 
churches in the colony. The Establishment had but one. 
In the revolution which followed we cannot claim that the 
Quakers played an important part, for they were not numer- 
ous. There were no considerable groups of new immigrants 
to South Carolina between 1696 and 1730. Ramsay esti- 
mates the population in 1704 at five or six thousand. In 
1724 it was estimated at 14,000 whites. Tliere were, perhaps, 
10,000 in 1710; of these, 42.5 per cent were Episcopalians. 
The Presbyterians appeared in the province at an early date, 
and, including the French, represented 45 per cent. The 
Anabaptists had appeared about 1685 ^"^^ had 10 per cent. 
The Quakers had only 2.5 per cent." 

The Quakers can claim, then, little part in the South 
Carolina uprising. This was mainly the work of the 

^Elvers, in Winsor, Nar. and Crit. Hist, of Amer., Vol. V. 
^Ramsay, II., 3. 

^ Rivers. Sketch of the History of South Carolina, 216. 
*Gov. Glen's Account, in Carroll, II., 248, 260. 



158 t'<outlitrn IJuakcr.s and ^<lai^crl/. 

Presbyterians and Baptists; but it is necessary to give a 
summary of the affair to understand the movement in North 
Carolina. Sir Nathaniel Johnson had been appointed Gov- 
ernor-General of Carolina in 1702, and, as usual, took up 
his residence in Charleston. 

Lord John Granville was the Palatine. He was a bigoted 
Churchman, and instructed Sir Nathaniel to see that the 
Church of England was made the Church of Carolina. John- 
son labored assiduously to accomplish the desires of the 
Palatine.' By dint of political trickery, some of it suggested 
by Lord Granville himself,' Johnson secured the passage of 
a law by the South Carolina Assembly, on May 6, 1704, 
which reproduced the essential principles of the Test Act of 
1673. It required all members of the Assembly to subscribe 
to the act of 1678, which disabled the Papists; to take the 
oath of allegiance to Queen Anne; to receive the sacra- 
ment according to the rites and usages of the Church of 
England, or to swear and subscribe to an oath of conformity 
to the Church of England. A penalty of fifty pounds for the 
first time the representative sat and ten pounds for every day 
thereafter was inflicted on all who refused to conform to this 
act, because it " hath been found by experience that the ad- 
mitting of persons of different persuasions and interests in 
matters of religion to sit and vote in the commons house of 
Assembly, hath often caused great contentions and animosi- 
ties in this province, and hath very much obstructed the pub- 
lic business." ' On November 4 of the same year the act was 
supplemented by a further act for " the Establishment of 
Religious Worship in this Province according to the Church 
of England, and for the Erecting of Churches for the Public 
Worship of God, and also for the Maintenance of Ministers 



I 



' Hawks, II., 504 ; Caruthers, Life of David CahlivcIL 60. 

•Hawks, II., 500. See also Col. Rec, I.. 639, 640. The Geueral 
Assembly was chosen with ••very j^reat jiartiality and injustice.'' 
•• This act was passeil in an iUeRal manner by theCJovernor's calling 
the Assembly to meet the '.36th nf April, when it then stood i)io- 
rogued to the 10th of .May following." 

■"■Act iu Cut. lice, of yurth Carclimt. II., 863-867. 



Quakers and the Established Church. 159 

and the Building Convenient Houses for them." ^ It estab- 
Ushed a commission of twenty laymen, which was given the 
power, on the recjucst of nine parishioners and a majority of 
the vestry, to cite the minister or rector before them, hear 
complaints against him, and if in their opinion the charges 
were sustained, to remove him either by delivering such an 
announcement into his hands, by leaving it at his home, or 
by fixing it to the church doors.^ Under the first of these 
laws it is evident that Friends were disfranchised. " Some 
of the Proprietors absolutely refused to join in the ratifica- 
tion of these acts," ^ and in the meantime the Dissenters, in- 
cluding the Quakers we may reasonably suppose, drew up 
a petition in which their grievances were recited, and for- 
warded it to the Proprietors by the hands of Joseph Boone.* 
About the same time Edmund Porter, a Quaker, appeared 
in England as the representative of the complaints and 
grievances of the northern colony. ° 

Lord Granville, the Palatine, received the petition of his 
subjects from the wilds of Carolina with haughty coldness. 

'In Col. iJec, II., 867-882. 

'Sees. XV. and xvi., Col. Rec, II., 873. 874. The acts were signed 
by Granville, Carteret, Craven and Colleton. 

^ Col. Rec I., 635 et seq. 

■•Petition in Col. Rec, I., 637 et seq. 

^Martin, I.. 219 ; Caruthers's Caldimll, 60 ; Hawks, II., 508. Dr. 
Hawks says that Porter accompanied John Ash, who was sent to 
England from South Carolina in 1703 to complain of the undue 
election of an Assembly, of heavy taxes and impositions on trade 
{Col. Rec. II., 901 et seq.) ; but this could not have been the case. 
The complaints which Ash carried are dated June 26, 1703, and his 
published account of his mission was issued in the same year. This 
was before the death of Walker, and consequently there had been 
at that time no fresh disturbances in North Carolina. I have been 
able to find no contemporary authority for the statement that 
Edmund Porter was the man who went to England on this occasion, 
but that such a messenger was sent there can be no doubt. Mis- 
sionary Gordon, writing in 1709, says that about 1704 ''the Quakers 
sevit complaints against Colonel Daniel." ''In the year 1706 they 
sent one Mr. John Porter to England, with fresh grievances and new 
complaUits.'''' [Col. Rec, I., 709.) This view is sustained by De 
Foe's Party-Tyranny; or. An Occasional Bill in Miniature ; As now 
Practiced in Carolina. London, 1705; reprinted in Col. Rec 11.. 
891 et seq. It is not improbable that Edmund Porter went over with 
Boone. 



160 Southern Quakers and Slavery. 

It was pushed into the House of Lords. After hearing the 
complaint of the colonists, and the Proprietors through 
their counsel, the Lords spiritual and temporal declared that 
the law passed by the Legislature of South Carolina for the 
establishment of religious worship was " not warranted by 
the charter granted to the Proprietors of that colony, as 
being not consonant to reason, repugnant to reason, repug- 
nant to the laws of this realm, and destructive to the consti- 
tution of the Church of England." They declared further 
that the act requiring all members of the Assembly to take 
the oath, subscribe to the declaration and conform in re- 
ligious worship, " is founded upon falsity in matter of fact, 
is repugnant to the laws of England, contrary to the charter 
granted to the Proprietors of that colony, is an encourage- 
ment to atheism and irreligion, is destructive to trade, and 
tends to the depopulating and ruining the said province." ^ 
This was not all. On the tenth of June, 1706, the obnoxious 
laws w-ere repealed by proclamation of the Queen, and the 
attorney-general was ordered to proceed against the Pro- 
prietors in quo warranto for a forfeiture of their charter.' 

The first effort to put into active operation in North Caro- 
lina the theory of the Proprietors in regard to an Establish- 
ment was in 1701, when the Churchmen, by "a great deal 
of care and management," secured the passage of an act 
under which the province was divided into parishes, the 
erection of churches and the salary of the minister provided 
for. The Quakers were at this time the largest body of Dis- 
senters in the province and the only organized one. They 
did not represent the wealth nor the intelligence of the 
colony, but had much influence. The Church party on this 
occasion seems to have caught them napping, but they col- 
lected their forces, elected a majority of the members of the 
next Assembly from their ranks, and were ready to rej^eal the 
vestry act of 1701 at the next session, but were spared this 
trouble by the Proprietors, who disallowed it. This ends 
the first struggle. 

' ( 'ol. Rec. , I. , 63C, 637. ' Ibid. , I. , 642, 643. 



Quakers and the Established Church. 161 

The second effort occurred while Daniel was Deputy 
Governor of North Carolina. Late in 1704, or early in 1705, 
a law, known as the " Vestry Act," was passed by the North 
Carolina Assembly by " one or two votes." No copy of the 
act has been preserved, and its loss has caused two views to 
be taken of the events of the next six years. Some think that 
no conformity was required. I examined the matter very 
carefully in my Religions Development in the Province of 
North Caroli?ia, and while admitting fully the difficulty and 
complexity of the subject, I still hold to the view advanced 
in that paper, that the North Carolina act was substantially 
identical with the South Carolina acts of 1704, and by means 
of a test oath virtually disfranchised all Dissenters. Now it 
seems that at about the time the troubles caused by the 
Church Act were at their height, an act passed in the first 
year of Queen Anne, requiring an oath of allegiance to her 
and her heirs in the Protestant line, reached North Carolina. 
Daniel presented this oath to the Quakers, who refused, it is 
said, to take it because they swore not at all. They were there- 
upon dismissed from the Council, the Assembly and courts 
of justice; moreover, a law was made that no one should 
hold any office or place of trust without taking these oaths.^ 
To complain against this new regulation seems to have been 
one of the duties of Edmund Porter, who was sent to Eng- 
land from North Carolina about this time, but it is self- 
evident that this did not represent the whole of his mission. 
It is probable also that the declaration of the House of Lords 
in regard to the religious acts in South Carolina was not 
without its good effect, for we find that the Proprietors, 
through the influence of Archdale,^ who was opposed to this 
system of legislating religion into the colony, were prevailed 
on to remove Daniel from his overlordship in North Caro- 
lina and to appoint another deputy governor in his place. 
This was done in 1705,' and Thomas Cary was nominated as 

> Col. Bee, I., 709. Cf. also Hawks, II., 509. 
^ Col. Bee, I., 709 ; Hawks, II., 440, 508. 



1(>2 Southtrit (Juahrr-s and Slavery. 

the successor of Daniel. His appointment seems to have 
given satisfaction at first to the Dissenters generally. When 
he came into power the Quakers made fresh efforts to obtain 
offices and a majority of the seats in the Assembly;' but 
Gary, like Daniel, tendered them the oath of allegiance, 
which they again refused to take, and were again dismissed 
from the Council, the Assembly and the courts of justice. 
Cary procured, moreover, the enactment of a law by which 
any party who procured his own election or who sat and 
acted officially under any election without first taking the 
required oaths should forfeit five pounds for each offense." 

This law exasperated the Quakers and their allies, whom 
we may call the popular party. It seemed now that all their 
struggles for liberty were to become of no account, and that 
they were to be disfranchised by the man whose nomination 
they had sanctioned. They had wasted time and incurred 
expense in the struggle, and victory was too near in sight to 
be given up without another effort. In 1706 they sent John 
Porter as an agent to England, " with fresh grievances and 
new complaints." ' Porter sympathized with but probably 
was not a member of the Society of Friends. He was suc- 
cessful in his efforts with the Proprietors. The authority of 
Governor Johnson was suspended; Gary was removed; sev- 
eral of the old deputies of the Proprietors were turned out of 
office; new appointments were made, and the power was 
given these deputies, who formed the Gouncil of the chief 
magistrate, to choose a new President of the Gouncil from 
among themselves and he was to act as Governor. Porter 
returned to North Carolina in October, 1707, and from his 
return the " Gary Rel^ellion " may be said to date. 

The historians of North Garolina, taking the aristocratic Pol- 
lock as their guide, have been constant in their denunciations 
of the principles of Gary and his followers; with them thev 
are rebel^^ and indefensible. A more charitable view, that 



' Col. Kcc, I., 709. '7Wd., I., 709 : Hawks. II.. 509. 

^Col. Rec, I., 709ctse(j. 



Quakers and the Established Church. 163 

these men were struggling for political rights against the 
representatives of despotic power, has been recently ad- 
vanced by Hon. William L. Saunders and Captain Samuel 
A. Ashe, and has been adopted by Hon. Kemp P. Battle; 
but the writer believes that the " rebellion " stands for more 
than a political struggle. It was the uprising of a free 
people against the attempt of foreign and domestic foes to 
saddle on them a church establishment with which they had 
no sympathy, and he has treated it as such. He does not 
believe it possible to explain the extent of the commotion on 
any other basis. 

After Porter announced the instructions he had received 
from the Proprietors, a day was appointed on which the old 
officers were to be suspended and the new ones to be quali- 
fied; but before that day arrived Porter called the new depu- 
ties together, a majority of whom were Quakers, and had 
them choose William Glover as President of the Council. 
He thus became Governor of the province ex officio, and 
Gary was suspended as Daniel had been.' Glover was a 
Churchman, but the popular party seem to have thought 
him favorable to their interests, and his election was sanc- 
tioned by Col. Gary, Porter and other leaders.^ It was be- 
lieved that the hateful laws against which they had been 
struggling, ivhatever the nature of these laivs may have 
been, would now be regarded as a dead letter, since the 
action of the Proprietors in removing Daniel and Gary, who 
had both undertaken to enforce them, was the plainest and 
most direct evidence that these laws were not intended for 
the province. It was not to be supposed that the Governors 
of the province would undertake to do more than was re- 
quired of them by the Proprietors, or what was directly 
against the will of the Proprietors, as the enforcement of the 
hateful acts and oaths was. Whatever may have been the 
legal relations of the popular party to the Proprietors hith- 
erto, they now appear not as rebels hindering the course of 

' Col. Rec, I., 709 et seq. ^Ibid.. I., 727. 



104 Southern Quakers and Slavery. 

law, but as patriots defending the rights granted them 
by the Proprietors and the Enghsh government; while their 
opponents could no longer pose as the representatives of 
law and order, but had clearly become usurpers, tyrants and 
autocrats, as far as they were able. It is no wonder, then, 
that when Glover, like Daniel and Gary, tendered the popu- 
lar party the ever present and ever hateful oaths, they, with 
their leader Porter, turned against him. Porter gets the 
old and the new deputies together, reverses the election of 
Glover, strikes up a friendship with Gary, who had perhaps 
promised to accede to their demands, and gets him chosen 
President of the Gouncil and therefore ex-officio Governor, 
and all this by virtue of the ver\' commission that had re- 
moved him from office.' 

Just as was to be expected. Glover and his party refused 
to recognize Gary as Governor; but the popular party did 
not cease their efforts, and the result was that the colony 
enjoyed for a while the tender mercies of rival governments. 
In this struggle the popular party is not so clearly in the 
wrong as some historians of the State, most notably Dr. 
Hawks,' would have us believe. He says that Gar}''s second 
election was accomplished by men who were unqualified for 
the duty, the old deputies having been suspended and the 
new ones unsworn; but Dr. Hawks forgets that Glover had 
been elected by the new deputies before they had been 
sworn; his election was therefore illegal and void and Gaiy 
was still Governor dc jtirc. The truth is that John Porter 
was the cleverest politician in all colonial North Carolina. 
He outwitted the Ghurch party so completely on this occa- 
sion that its defenders are still unable to comprehend his 
policy. The pretended election of Glover was simply in- 
tended by the astute politician as a feeler to indicate the true 
position of the two aspirants for gubernatorial honors to- 
ward the great question of the day, the test oaths. No one 
knew better than Porter that under the circumstances the 



Ci)l. Rec, L, 709 et seq. ^History of North Carolina, II., 510. 



Quakers and the Established Church. 165 

election of Glover was null and void. He soon discovered 
that Glover was not the friend of the popular party. Gary 
probably promised to respect their wishes if allowed to retain 
his office; this promise was accepted and the last instructions 
of the Proprietors were ignored. 

The double government continued during 1708. The 
matter was finally referred to an Assembly, the Gary or 
popular party won, were recognized by the Proprietors and 
continued to hold sway until the arrival of Hyde as Gov- 
ernor in the summer of 171 o. It is no doubt true that Gary 
and the Quakers fell into errors and committed blunders that 
are not to be defended. There was a reaction in 1710 in 
favor of the Establishment, and the Assembly of 171 1 
passed various offensive laws, among them one, evidently 
aimed at the Quakers, which fined every officer 100 pounds 
who refused to qualify himself " according to the strictness 
of the laws of Great Britain now in force." 

The hostility to Gary was so great that he was driven into 
active rebellion. He collected a company of men and made 
an effort to capture Governor Hyde. The uprising was put 
down in July, 171 1. 

This period of civil discord has been frequently called a 
" Quaker rebellion," and waiters on the history of the colony, 
notably Dr. Hawks, have accused the Quakers of all sorts of 
crimes, from furnishing Gary and his followers with arms 
and ammunition from England, to inciting the Tuscaroras to 
murder the whites. It has been said, and has been generally 
believed, that the Quakers were prominent in the appeal to 
arms. 

It is clear that Quakers took an important part in the first 
half of the struggle. They were fighting the Establishment 
and most probably a test oath at the same time. There was 
certainly more at stake than the simple oath of allegiance, 
for this would suffice to draw neither other Protestant Dis- 
senters nor Ghurchmen to their side. Their actions in this 
part of the struggle seem to have been perfectly legitimate, 
but they were sometimes unnecessarily harsh. When we 



166 Southern Quakers and Slavery. 

come to the second outbreak under Car>' in 1710-11 we find 
some actions that are blameworthy and not in accord with 
their well-estabhshed principles. There are two parts to the 
quarrel: the first was waged in the arena of politics; the 
second was tried with the sword. In the first, Quakers had 
a large share, but I am coming more and more to the 
opinion that they had little to do with the second part. Of 
the few names coming down to us of individuals who took a 
hand in 1710-11, few Quaker names are found except that 
of Emmanuel Lowe, the son-in-law of Archdale. Gary was 
also a son-in-law of Archdale, but we do not know that he 
was a Quaker. I have recently discovered from the records 
of the Quakers that they brought Lowe to trial for his part 
in the uprising. The Yearly Meeting of 171 1 appointed a 
committee to examine into the action of Lowe " in stirring 
up a parcell of men in Arms and going to Pamlico, And 
from There to Chowan In a Barkentine with men And Force 
of Arms Contrary to our holy Principles." Lowe was not 
only tried, but was deposed from his position as a member 
of the executive committee of the Yearly Meeting and 
another was chosen to fill his place, " the said Low having 
acted divers things contrar)' to our ways and principles." ^ 
Now, if Lowe, one of their most prominent men, was 
tried, it follows that the lesser offenders would have been 
tried jikewise; but there is no provision for such trial. The 
conclusion is that the Quakers, as an organization, had no- 
thing to do with this part of the movement, but that they 
continued steadfast in their testimony against war. They 
refused during the next four years to take part in the Indian 
war, and this discovery relieves them of the inconsistency of 
bearing arms at one time and refusing at another, and agrees 
with the statement of Pollock that they became good citizens 
when left to themselves. 



'See Minutes of Meeting for Sufferings. January 26, 1718, the 
Proprietors ordered the President of North Carolina to restore to 
Lowe a barkentine which had been seized and condemned. I pre- 
sume that this was the vessel in which Gary sailed to capture Hyde. 



Quakers and the Estahlished Church. 167 

There were no more religious rebellions in these provinces. 
The Quakers maintained steadily their testimony against 
tithes and a hireling ministr}^ until the Revolution, when the 
Establishment was overthrown; but as that time drew nearer 
their influence became relatively weaker, and the work of 
resistance to the State Church passed from Friends to the 
Presbyterian and other stronger denominations. 

Quakers, like other Dissenters, suffered in all of these 
provinces under the law which made the Church of Eng- 
land the Established Church and gave it a tithe for its sup- 
port. But in no other body, perhaps, do we see as much of 
that thirst for the martyr's crown which characterized to 
such a large extent the lives and actions of the early Chris- 
tians. In 1696 we find one of the regulations for the guid- 
ance of North Carolina Friends advising: "That all Friends 
suffering for truth's sake be kept upon record, and the 
names of those who takes away their goods, and the names 
of him for whom they are taken, with the day of the month 
and year be set down." This was renewed in 1723 and 
again in 1756. 

That the Quakers kept up their testimony steadily is evi- 
dent from the small amounts the Churchmen were able to 
collect out of them in North Carolina. In 1726 Friends in 
Perquimans complain of unlawful distraint, and report the 
case to the Meeting for Sufferings in London. In 1755 a 
remissness was found in some who did not keep up the 
" ancient and christian testimony against tithes and priests' 
wages," and a committee was appointed whose duty it was 
" to take the opportunity with some of the vestry so as to 
inform themselves on what account the levies are laid, be- 
fore the time of the same, in order to prevent the like here- 
after." Sufferings in 1756, chiefly for the maintenance "of 
an hireling priest," iio 14s. 5d.; two years later it was £14 
17s. 6d. for same cause. The next year there was "a. 
shortness in some Friends in respect to a compliance with 
the payment of the demand to support a hireling ministry. 
Friends are recommended to be more careful, diligent, 



168 Southern Quakers and Slavery. 

watchful." Sufferings for tithes and "malissia" fines, 1759, 
i85 and over; 1760, £23; 1761, "Friends have had no suff- 
erings this year; part we beHeve is owing in a great measure 
to the moderation of the officers." No sufferings in 1762, 
nor in 1765; 1768, fines reported amounted to £5 4s., "being 
for priests' wages and repairing of their houses called 
churches." In 1772, no suffering, except 30s., " church 
rates so-called"; none in 1773 or 1774. 

In South Carolina the first Church act, passed in 1698, 
the acts of 1704, which had caused such an uproar, and all 
others then in force, were repealed in 1706 and a new one 
enacted which remained in force until the Revolution. It 
established the Church of England, making such minor pro- 
visions as are usual in such cases, and forbade all marriages 
contrary' to the established fashion. The Quakers were too 
few to influence legislation; they report no sufferings to the 
North Carolina Yearly Meeting, but it is more than prob- 
able that they suffered for tithes and muster fines as in other 
colonies.^ 

The religious history of Georgia is very much like that of 
the other colonies. The trustees of Georgia were very much 
in accord with the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel, 
and on Marcli 17, 1758, an act was passed which established 
the Church of England in the province. It remained until 
the Revolution. There had been special favors shown the 
Quakers in the charter as an inducement to settle, and, al- 
though under an Establishment, no complaints of hard 
usage have come down to us. 

Besides tithes, Virginia Quakers suffered under the laws 
relating to marriage. So far as I have been able to find, 
there were no provisions for them to celebrate the rites of 
matrimony after their peculiar fashion before the law of 1780. 
In this matter North Carolina was ahead of Virginia. But 
we have the clearest evidence that they had married in their 
own fashion from very early times. Tlic X'irginia law of 

' Cooper's Statutes at Large of South Carolina, II., 281 et seq. 



Quakers and the Estahlished Church. 1G9 

March, 1662, provided that all marriages should be by li- 
cense or publication of banns and be performed by a min- 
ister, all others being declared illegal.' The laws of 1696 
and 1705 provided that marriage should be celebrated only 
in accordance with forms in the Book of Common Prayer/ 
It was the same under the law of 1748.° The laws of 1780 
and 1784 legalized marriages which had been celebrated 
previous to this date by Dissenters, and gave the Quakers 
authority to celebrate the rite after their own fashion.* This 
is substantially the history of the matter in North Carolina. 
They married after their own fashion, but without consent 
of the Government and therefore illegally, until the passage 
of the law of 1778. It was presumably the same in South 
Carolina and Georgia. 

The first provision in any of these States in the matter of 
the oath was made in Virginia. Such provisions had been 
made in England in 7 and 8 William III., 1696-97, and in 
the Virginia act of October, 1705, for the establishment of a 
general court, provision was made that they be allowed to 
affirm and declare, as was provided for by the English act.° 
How they had fared in Virginia in previous years we can judge 
in part from the experience of Porter in 1663, when the oath 
was made the test of orthodoxy. Whether there were many 
cases under this law, or whether Virginia Friends refused to 
take it, as is probable, we are not informed. This antedated 
the North Carolina law of the same character by ten years. 
Under the North Carolina act of 171 5 every Quaker who 
was " required upon any lawful occasion to take an oath in 
any case " was permitted to make his affirmation instead," as 
follows: "I, A. B., do declare in the presence of God, the 

' Hening, II., 49. ■' Ibid., III., 149, 441. ' Ibid.. VI., 81. 

^Ihid., X.. 361 ; XL, 504. '- Ibid., III.. 298 ; IV., 354. 

^ Col. Rec, II., 884. This is in substance the same as the act of 7 
and 8 William III., which was continued by 13 and 14 William III., 
chap 4, and was made perpetual by an act of 1 George I. But it is 
evident that the form of the affirmation was not satisfactory, for by 
8 George I., chap. 6, 1721. the affirmation required was modified to : 
'■'•I, A. B., do solemnly, sincerely and truly declare and affirm."' 



170 Southern Quakers and Slavery. 

witness of the truth of what I say." It seems this was in- 
tended to meet all conditions, for the preamble recites that 
the oath was to be taken in " courts of justice mtd other 
places^ But it is added, ''that no Quaker or reputed 
Quaker shall by virtue of this act be qualified or permitted 
to give evidence in any criminal causes, or to serve on any 
Jury, or bear any office or place of profit or trust in the gov- 
ernment." ' It was probably under this act that William 
Borden was not allowed to take his seat in the Assembly. 
In 1747 Borden appeared as a member of the Assembly duly 
elected from the county of Carteret. He informed the au- 
thorities that he was a Quaker and " therefore desired his 
solemn affirmation might be taken," which he evidently ex- 
pected to be done. This affirmation a committee of the 
Council appointed to qualify the members of the Lower 
House refused to receive, and a new election for a successor 
to Borden was ordered/ 

No reports were sent up to the Yearly Meeting on these 
matters from South Carolina and Georgia. In Georgia the 
matter was settled by the charter. In South Carolina 
Quakers enjoyed the right of affirmation in 1682. It is 
probable that some later law took the right from them. 
There is nothing in Cooper's Statutes at Large of South 
Carolina to indicate that they were enjoying the right in 
1776. 

' In 1741 a proposed new liberty of conscience act was defeated. 

- Col. Rcc.^ IV., 855-857. We are constrained to ask wliat sort of 
an oath the Quaker had to take to attain these things and of wliat 
particular service this iiigh sounding act'' for liberty of conscience'' 
could be to him V Was this act a sort of ])laythir.g for exhibition 
only V Did the Quakers avail themselves of it? In Pennsylvania 
they refused to make the alJirmation, which was simply the regular 
oath prescribed b}- the Englisli government with a simple substitu- 
tion of " affirm " for " swear. '' 



. CHAPTER VIII. 
* Quakers and their Testimony against War. 
I. — Before the Revolution. 

Southern Quakers have been pretty uniform in their 
testimony against war. Their position met with small re- 
spect in any of these colonies. They refused to train and 
wxre fined. They refused to pay the fine and it was col- 
lected by distress or they were imprisoned. They were 
alike unmoved by distress or imprisonment. The ofBcers 
were forced to abandon persecution by the firm meekness 
of the persecuted. 

Friends were always careful to put their sufiferings on 
record. Whatever else the Quaker might sufifer, he could 
not bear for the shade of oblivion to come over the re- 
cord of his testimonies. They seem to have suffered from 
militia laws at an earlier period in Virginia than in North 
Carolina. The first law that comes under our notice is 
the one of 1666, which recites that " divers refractory per- 
sons " have " refused to appeare upon the dayes of exer- 
cise and other times when required to attend upon the pub- 
lique service," and then imposes on them for each neglect 
a fine of 100 pounds of tobacco.^ The new militia act of 1705 ' 
makes no exemption of Quakers. The fine was the same as 
before. It was collected by distress, or imprisonment was 
inflicted, and the records indicate that Friends suffered from 
the law. 

The first trial of this kind in North Carolina dates from 
1680. In the Culpeper rebellion in this colony in 1677, 
Friends first gave their allegiance to the government of 
Miller and Eastchurch. When the party of the people 

' Hening, II., 246. «/6id., III., 335. 



172 Southrnt Qua Jeers and Slavery. 

came into power, in accord with their well-known princi- 
ples of non-resistance, they submitted to it; but declared 
themselves a " separated people," and that they " stood 
single from all the seditious actions " which had taken 
place in Albemarle in 1677, 1678 and 1679/ 

" Then some suffering fell upon friends which we not 
finding in ye old Book, we thought good to insert here; 
so that it may be seen generations to come," says the 
chronicler, writing of the year 1680. " It was thus, the 
government made a Law that all that would not bear arms 
in ye Musterfield, should be at ye Pleasure of ye Court 
fined, accordingly friends not bearing arms in ye field; 
they had several friends before ye Court, and they fined 
them he that had a good Estate a great sum & ye rest 
according to their estates; and Cast them into prison, & 
when they were in prison, they went & levied their fines 
upon their estates; There were nine friends put in prison, 
viz. William Bundy John Price, Jon^ Phelps James Hogg 
John Thusstone Henry Prows Rich. Byer Sam^ Hill 
Steven Handcock. They were put in prison about ye 
fourth or fifth month, 1680 and continued in about six 
months." 

This record of persecution comes to us from the manu- 
script records of the Society. It is a new one, and one 
which the author is inclined to attribute entirely to the dis- 
ordered state of the colony. The " rebellion " of Culpeper 
was at an end, but its leaders were still the controllers of 
the policy of the government, and the persecution may have 
been due to vindictiveness against the publishers of the pro- 
test which we have noticed. This is borne out by the 
fact that of the nine Friends imprisoned, the names of three, 
perhaps of five, were signed to the protest. There seems 
to have been no further persecution. 

The North Carolina Quakers were prominent in the first 
part of the " Car}' Rebellion," 1705-07. This was a war 



' Col. Bee, I., 250-253. 



QuakcvH and their Testimony against War. 173 

of words only, and has been discussed in another chapter. 
They refused to fight in the Indian war of 1711-13. They 
steadily exhorted each other not to go to this war, and 
even punished such of their members as paid the five pound 
penalty .attached to the refusal. As soon as the Govern- 
ment ceased to persecute them, they settled down to quiet 
and made good citizens. 

North Carolina Quakers seem to have had a compara- 
tively easy time. In theory they were under disadvantages 
from muster laws, but in reality they suffered little. • In 
1740 they protest against the tax levied to provide a maga- 
zine for each county, for that would be " to wound " their 
tender conscience. In the same year they consult London 
Friends as to paying the tax levied in provisions to sup- 
port troops. We do not know the answer. Committees 
were appointed from time to time to confer with the au- 
thorities on this and similar matters. They seem to have 
come to little conclusion. Muster fines, sometimes col- 
lected by distress, are reported at nearly every meeting, but 
they were small in amount, and the muster law, like the 
tithe law, seems to have been spasmodically enforced. 

In Virginia, on the other hand, Friends had a harder 
road to travel. Fines were heavier and were more rigidly 
collected. As early as 1702 the Yearly Meeting recorded 
that " Friends are generally fined for not bearing arms 
and that grand oppression of priests wages, though the 
magistrates are pretty moderate at present and truth gains 
ground." In 171 1 Governor Spotswood came in conflict 
with Friends over this testimony. He undertook to force 
assistance from them on the ground that otherwise the lazy 
and cowardly would plead conscience;^ some Friends 
yielded so far as to assist in building forts. The sense of 
the Yearly Meeting was " that those Friends who have 
given away their Testimony, by hiring, paying, or work- 
ing, to make any fort, or defence against enemies, do give 

' Spotswood's Letters, I., 120. 



174 Southern (Jiiabrs and Slavery. 

from iiiKlcr their hands to the monthly meeting for the 
clearing the truth." 

It is to be understood, of course, that there was no recog- 
nition or exemption of dissenting ministers in the mihtary 
acts. The military law of 1705 exempted "ministers,"^ 
while that of 1723 confined it to ministers of the Church 
of England.'' This indicates that dissenting ministers had 
claimed exemption under the broader law, and that the 
Assembly was not willing to recognize them. 

The act of November, 1738, exempted all Quakers from 
personal service, but required them to furnish a substitute,' 
or to be fined for neglect. This law, while seeming to be 
one looking toward recognition of the peculiar views of 
Friends, was not in reality such. To a society which con- 
demns war and all its paraphernalia /// foio, personal ex- 
emption can be no favor. It was no favor to a Quaker to 
allow him to send a substitute or pay a fine. In 1739 they 
record that their sufferings had been " very considerable," 
both on account of " militia and priests' wages," and are 
of the opinion that they " are likely to increase greatly on 
that account." In 1742 they say "the men in militar\^ 
power act toward us in several counties with as much lenity 
and forbearance as we can reasonably expect, as they are 
ministers of the law; tho in some places they are not so 
favourable," and Friends had been in prison for neglect of 
militar)' duties during the visit of Bownas. 

The year of the French and Indian war and the period 
just preceding it were times of great trial to Friends in this 
matter. The English settlers believed that French agents 
were trying to stir up the Indians, and that in the on- 
slaught against English civilization the Indians would be 
led by Frenchmen, little more civilized or humane in their 
conduct of war than the savages themselves. To guard 
against this the Assembly of Virginia passed various acts 
in 1748, 1754, 1755, 1756, I757» 1758, 1759. for raising 

•Hening, III., 336. 'Ibid., IV., 118. ' Ibid., V., 16. 



Quakers and their Testimony against War. 175 

levies and recruits, for the better training of militia, and 
keeping them in readiness. The Assembly also undertook 
to increase the number of available troops, and, to fill the 
quotas of the miUtia, passed laws in May and August, 1755, 
requiring the members of the county militia who had no 
wives or children to stand a draft; but any person drafted 
might secure a substitute, or be released on the payment 
of 'ten pounds. If they refused they were imprisoned until 
they agreed to serve, to procure a substitute, or paid the 
fine. From time to time it voted various sums to be ex- 
pended on these matters and on the better defense of the 
province.^ 

The tax, since it was laid for war purposes, was a source 
of trouble. But Friends generally complied in paying this 
tax without inquiring too closely into the way it was spent. 
English Friends wrote that this was their custom, and it 
was also the custom of the Pennsylvania Friends.' This 
caused some of the Friends who were not anxious to pose 
as martyrs to treat the fine for refusing to stand the draft 
or procure a substitute as a part of the general levy. This 
fine when paid also went for war purposes, but the 
Society as a whole denounced the practice and warned their 
members against it. 

The act of August, 1755, did not exempt the Quakers.' 
An act of March, 1756,* provided that every twentieth man 
of the county militia should be drafted and sent to the 
frontier at Winchester under Col. Washington. This is 
followed by another for "better regulating and discipling 
the militia," ' which exempted ministers of the Church of 

^ Hening, IX., 112, 435 ei seq. 

- Applegarth's Quakers in Pennsylvania, J. H. U. Studies in Hist, 
and Pol. Science. X. 

^Hening, VI., 521. The next act, for " the better regulating and 
training the militia." in prescribing accoutrements says "that 
every person so as aforesaid inlisted (except the people commonly 
called Quakers, free mulattoes, negroes and Indians)," etc., which 
indicates that they were not on the same footing as others, but that 
this did not mean exemption is shown clearly from their records. 
Nor are they included in the list of exempted persons mentioned in 
section three of the same act. 

•* Hening, VII. , 9 et seq. ' Ibid. , VII. , 93. 



17G Soutltcni Quakers and Slavery. 

England, but no dissenting ministers. Xor were Quakers 
mentioned in the section directing the accoutrements, as 
was done in the similar act of August, 1755. They were 
shown no favors, and the Yearly Meeting records of 1757 
state that seven young men had already been carried to 
the frontier. They asked advice of London Yearly Meeting 
in the case. They exhorted the men thus tried to remain 
faithful to their testimony, took up a collection for their 
relief, and recorded that Friends were " pretty generally 
faithful." In their epistle to London Yearly ^Meeting in 
1757 they stated that those Friends were now released who 
had been imprisoned the year before, that application had 
been made to the Assembly about this requirement, and 
that the officers now had a more favorable opinion of 
Friends. This was probably the severest trial through 
which A^irginia Friends were called to go because of this 
testimony. 

The North Carolina Quakers also thought it necessary 
for them to attend the courts-martial in 1758 and give the 
reasons of Friends for not attending musters, and likewise 
to send a petition to the Governor against the militia law, 
but it does not appear that they were brought to trial on 
these points during the F"rench and Indian war. 

In 1766 Virginia Quakers appointed a conmiittee to pe- 
tition the Assembly for relief from military fines, etc. This 
petition may have had influence on the law passed in No- 
vember, 1766.' By this law Quakers were exempted from 
appearing at private or general musters, and were not re- 
quired to provide a set of arms as all other exempts were. 
So far the law is good; it is further provided that the chief 
militia officer in each county should list all Quakers of 
military age, and if '■'ceded, these would have to go into 
actual service just as other persons, except that the}' might 
furnish a substitute or pay a fine of ten pounds. But the 
number of Quakers who were thus required to serve or 
find substitutes was not to exceed the proportion the whole 

'Hening, V III.. 211. 



Quakers and their Testimony against War. 177 

number of Quakers bore to the whole number of other 
militia. The law required also that no Quaker should be 
exempted from musters unless he produced a testimonial 
that he was a iw?ia fide Quaker. 

This law was a decided gain for the Quaker, although 
it was not a complete recognition of his position on war. 
It recognized this position absolutely in times of peace by 
exempting him from musters, and even gave him a privi- 
lege over other exempts by relieving him from the re- 
quirement to furnish a set of arms. But it failed him en- 
tirely in time of war. As early as 1755 an attempt had 
been made in North Carolina to get a law exempting 
Quakers, but it was opposed by the Council, who offered 
to substitute in place of the regular equipment of the soldier 
that of the pioneer — axe, spade, shovel or hoe.'' This 
failed to become law; but by the terms of a special act, 
which is substantially a copy of the Virginia law of 1766, 
passed in 1770 for five years, Quakers were released from 
attendance on general or private musters, provided that 
they were regularly listed and served in the regular militia 
in case of insurrection or invasion." From a petition which 
the Quakers presented to the Governor and the Assembly 
of North Carolina in October, 1771, we may conclude that 
Tryon had in some cases exempted them from the penalty 
of the laws. We find also certificates of unity given to 
some of their members, who were liable to military duty, 
in 1771. These certificates seem to have relieved them 
practically from all militia requirements. 

At the beginning of the Revolution, Friends had been 
exempted from attending musters in Virginia and North 
Carolina, but not from being enrolled in the militia or from 
serving in case of insurrection. I ha\'e found no indica- 
tions that Quakers had been exempted at this time from 
militar}^ laws in South Carolina and Georgia. They were 
too weak in both of these provinces to afifect their legisla- 

1 Col. Bee. v., 269, 291, 506. 538. 

* Davis's Revised, ed. 1773, 455 ; see also the acknowledgment of 
the Quakers in Col. Rec, IX., 176. 



178 Soiit/ttrit (JiKikcrs and ^'Slaccry. 

tion. There had been some suffering in South CaroUna 
on account of this testimony about the time of the Yem- 
assee war in 1715. 

Quakers kept a careful record of all the fines they suf- 
fered by distress or otherwise. These sufferings varied 
from year to year according to the personal feeling of the 
officers. They were heavier in \'irginia than in North Caro- 
lina; only in 1759 do we find an entry in that State of suffer- 
ings amounting to £85 and over for tithes and " malissia " 
fines. The chief cause of suffering there was for tithes. In 
V'irginia, on the other hand, the fines seem to have been 
about equally divided.^ 

There has been an extensive belief that Friends were 
active in the War of the Regulation in North Carolina in 
1771. This belief is founded partly on the charge of Gov- 
ernor Tr\'on, that the Regulators were a faction of Baptists 
and Quakers who were trying to overthrow the Church of 
England. This charge, like the similar charge made by the 
aristocracy in North Carolina in t 705-11, is more easily 
made than proved. The Quakers are easily shown from 
their records not to have been Regulators. There were, 
of course, individual Quakers who took part in the Regu- 
lation; many more no doubt sympathized with the prin- 
ciples advocated; but no complicity with the events of 1766- 
71 was tolerated by the meetings in their organic capacity. 

The foundation for this charge lies, no doubt, largely 
in the fact that Hermon Husband,' the leader of the Regu- 

'They have recorded tines for neglect of military duty in Vir- 
ginia as follows: 1740, £12 5s.; 1741. £34 lis. od.; 1742. £61 Is.; 
1743, £131 8s. Id.; 1744. £59 14s. 8d.; 1745, £10 9s. 2d.: 174G, £16 14s.; 
1750, £4 lis. 6d.; 1757. £86 19s. 4Ad.. mostly military. From this 
time there is no distinction between "priests' wages" and militia 
fines. The sums are as follows : 1758. £98 13s. 5d.; 1759. £108 6s. 
lOd.; 1760. £90 14s.; 1761. £80 13s.; 1702. £103: 1763. £74 12s. 6d.; 
1764. £113 lis. lOd.; 1765, £109 ; 1766. £133 ; 1767, £67 ; 1768, £3 5s. 

'His Christian name was evidently pronounced "Harmon." 

This autograph was kindly furnished by Mr. Ja('()b I^. Husband, of 
Baltimore. 



Quakers and their Testimony against War. 179 

lators, had been a Quaker. He had been disowned by the 
Society, however, but not for immorality, as Governor Tryon 
states. Since no North CaroHna Quaker is more widely 
known than Husband, it is desirable that we know as many 
facts as possible of his life. Hermon Husband was bom 
October 3, 1724, in all probability in Cecil County, Md. 
His grandfather, William Husband, made a will, March 25, 
1717. He writes himself as of "Sissil" County, Maryland; 
he had cattle, " Hog-gs and sheape," and negroes, and 
speaks of " the Iron works that belongs to me." He had 
a good deal of land. William, the father of Hermon, was 
also of Cecil County. His will was probated March 10, 
1768. He also had negroes, and was not a Quaker. His 
son Joseph,' born February 15, 1736(37), was the first of 
the family to turn Quaker. His convincement influenced 
Hermon among others. Hermon became a prominent man 
among the Quakers of East Nottingham, Md. He once 
got a certificate to visit Barbadoes. He was first in North 
Carolina about 1751, when he removed to Carver's Creek 
Monthly Meeting in Bladen County. How long he re- 
mained here we do not know, but on December 6, 1755' 
he presented a certificate of removal to Cane Creek 
Monthly Meeting. He returned from Cane Creek to Not- 
tingham in 1759, and, on February 27, 1761, presented a 
certificate of removal from Cane Creek to West River 
Monthly Meeting, Md. He got a certificate to go back 
to Cane Creek, July 24, 1761, and on July 3, 1762, Friends 
report to Cane Creek that the marriage of Hermon Hus- 
band and Mary Pugh had been orderly." 

' See Memorials of Deceased Friends, Philadelphia, 1787. 

'^ At this period Husband also set up some claims to authorship, 
as the following title will show: Some | Remarks | on | Religion, | 
With the Author's Experience in Pursuit thereof, | For the Con- 
sideration of all People ; | Being the real Truth of what happened. I 
Simply delivered, without the Help of School-Words, or Dress | 
of Learning. | Philadelphia: | Printed by William Bradford for the 
Author. I M.DCC.LXI. Octavo, pp. 38. (Hildeburn's Issues of the 
Press in Pa.) The copy in Library Company of Philadelphia has 
the author's name noted on the title-page in the handwriting of 
Du Simitiere. At the end of the tract it is said to have been 
" written about the year 1750. " 



ISO Soidhcni Quakers and Slavery. 

This year a commotion began in Cane Creek Monthly 
fleeting which led to the disownment of Husband, the 
suspension of others, and involved the monthly meeting, 
the quarterly meeting, and even the Yearly Meeting, in a 
religious wrangle. The origin of this trouble was as fol- 
lows: In 1762, Rachel Wright, a member of Cane Creek 
Monthly Meeting, committed some disorder. She offered 
a paper condemning the same. This seems to have been 
accepted, and in 1763 she asked for a certificate of re- 
moval to Fredericksburg, S. C. But some members of the 
monthly meeting thought she was not sincere in the paper 
offered and did not wish to give her the certificate. A 
wrangle resulted, and the case was appealed to the quar- 
terly meeting, which recommended that the certificate be 
given. Husband, evidently a man who was accustomed 
to speak fearlessly, was thereupon " guilty of making re- 
marks on the actions and transactions" of the meeting; he 
spoke " his mind," and was guilty of " publicly advertis- 
ing the same"; for this he was disowned by Cane Creek 
Monthly Meeting, January 7, 1764. But in the meantime 
his party had grown, and a number of Friends signed a 
paper in which they expressed dissatisfaction with the dis- 
owning of Husband. The quarterly meeting then ap- 
pointed a committee to advise with the malcontents, of 
whom the leaders were said to be Hermon Husband, 
Joseph Maddock, Isaac Vernon, Thomas Branson, John . A 

and William Marshill, and Jonathan (Cell, J " with divers S -^^-^^ 
others." In February, 1764, the committee report " that 
it would be of dangerous consequences to allow them the 
privilege of active members, or to be made use of as such 
in any of our meetings of business until suitable satisfaction 
is made for their outgoings." Maddock, Cell and the Mar- 
shills felt " uneasy and aggrieved with the proceedings and 
judgement of this meeting," and filed notice of an appeal 
to the Yearly Meeting. The Yearly fleeting decided that 
Western Quarterly Meeting did wrong in granting a cer- 
tificate to Rachel Wright, " if it was to ])v made a prece- 



Quakers and their Testimony against War. 181 

dent," and that the minute of the quarterly meeting which 
suspended from active membership those who had signed 
the other paper expressing dissatisfaction with the disown- 
ing of Hermon Husband should be reversed. The quar- 
terly meeting thereupon acknowledged itself wrong in the 
matter of Rachel Wright; Fredericksburg Monthly Meeting 
was informed of the conditions surrounding the certificate, 
and the parties under ban were restored to active membership, 
for we find Joseph Maddock and William Marshill serving as 
representatives from Cane Creek Monthly Meeting to 
Western Quarterly Meeting in February, 1765. But this 
did not restore Husband. He had been formally disowned, 
and disappears from this time from the records of North 
Carolina Quakerism. It is probable that some of these 
discontented Friends were led by this trouble to join the 
Regulators. It does not appear that the trouble was 
healed, for we find that two men, Joseph Maddock and 
Jonathan Sell, laid the foundation of the Georgia settle- 
ment of Friends in 1770. They were no doubt the same 
as the persons who have just been mentioned. It is prob- 
able that they carried a considerable contingent of settlers 
with them from Cane Creek. 

It is now time for us to return to Hermon Husband and 
the part taken by Friends in the War of the Regulation. 
Caruthers, who gives the traditions among the people who 
knew him, characterizes Husband as a man of superior 
mind, grave in deportment, somewhat taciturn, wary in 
conversation, but when excited, forcible and fluent in argu- 
ment. He was a man of strict integrity and firm in his 
advocacy of the right. He had considerable property, and 
took the part of the people in their complaints against the 
extortions of the ofificers. He was a member of the Assem- 
bly in 1769 and 1770. • His participation in the Regulation 
movement brought the Government down on him, and he 
was imprisoned for more than fifty days, awaiting trial on 
charges on which the grand jury could not agree to return 
an indictment. He was also presented for riot under an 



182 Southern Quakers and Slavery. 

ex post facto law, and was six times acquitted by juries 
in Craven and Orange counties of all offenses alleged 
against him. He was expelled from the Assembly, and af- 
ter the battle of the Alamance, at which he was not present, 
was outlawed, and a reward of iioo, or i,ooo acres of land, 
was oft'ered for his arrest, dead or alive. He soon left North 
Carolina, returned to Pennsylvania, and became prominent 
in the Whiskey Rebellion in 1794.^ 

Husband's career was clearly inconsistent with the un- 
warlike creed of the Quakers. His intentions were prob- 
ably good, but because he had been a Quaker, the Societ}' 
has had the credit of being a leader in the movement that 
culminated in the battle of the Alamance on May 16, 1771. 
Without entering at all into the merits of that struggle, it 
is sufficient to say that Friends, as a body, had nothing 
to do with it, and in their olificial capacity condemned it 
to the fullest extent. A few extracts from their records 
will show this clearly. Cane Creek Meeting was in the 
center of the disturbance. The first mention we find of the 
troubles is in 1766, v/hen seven members were disowned 
for attending a " disorderly meeting," probably one of the 
mass-meetings with which the countr}- was then alive. In 
1768 two Quakers were complained of for joining a body 
of persons to withdraw from the paying of the taxes. They 
were disowned. In 1 769 Hermon Cox was disowned for join- 
ing the Regulators. In 1771 'denials w^ere published against 
Benjamin and James Underwood, Joshua Dixon, Isaac 
Cox, Samuel Cox and his two sons, Hermon and Samuel, 
James Matthews, John and Benjamin Hinshaw, William 
Graves, Nathan Farmer, Jesse Pugh, William Tanzy, John 
and William Williams, who all seem to have been Regula- 
tors. Thomas Pugh was also disowned for joining, and 
Humphrey Williams for aiding thejii. Three men were 

'I find in the minutes of Western Quarterly Meeting in 1766 a 
notice of the disorderly murriiipe of "Aniej' Allin now Husbands." 
Was this a second wife of Hermon Husband? In May, 1788, 
William nusl)and was disowned by Cane Creek for fighting. Was 
he a son of Hermon V 



I 



Quakers and their Testinioni/ against War. 183 

disowned by New Garden Monthly Meeting for joining, 
and a fourth condemned himself in meeting for aiding " with 
a gun." 

These are all the cases I have found that indicate the 
participation of the Quakers in the political and civil troubles 
of the day. They remained faithful to the Government. 
Governor Tryon made a requisition on them for twenty 
beeves and ten barrels of flour for his army. They agreed 
to furnish the things demanded, but pleaded that they could 
not do it within the limits of time set. In 1772 Friends 
asserted their loyalty and attachment to George III., and at 
the beginning of the Revolution the Yearly Meeting, in its 
letter to the Society in North Carolina, South Carolina, and 
Georgia, gave forth their " testimony against all Plotting, 
Conspiracies, and insurrections against the king and govern- 
ment whatsoever as works of darkness." 

The Regulation, no doubt, had a bad effect on the Society 
in this section. The minutes of Cane Creek Monthly Meet- 
ing from January, 1770, to June, 1771, fill but two pages, 
as if outside matters were attracting their attention. There 
were, moreover, many removals and few arrivals at Cane 
Creek. These troubles caused, no doubt, a considerable 
exodus of Quakers to Bush River, S. C, and to Wrights- 
borough, Ga., just as they sent many members of the Sandy 
Creek Baptist Association from the same section to the 
banks of the Watauga in Eastern Tennessee. 

2. — Quakers in the Rcvohition. 

The Revolution begins the differentiation of the conduct 
and fortunes of the Society of Friends in Virginia and North 
Carolina. Their experience was different in each, and this 
experience seems to have had a marked influence on future 
action. 

Their peace policy caused American Friends to be re- 
garded by many as hostile to the cause of American in- 
dependence. Some went to the Society to escape the war. 



184 Southern Quakers and Slavery. 

and some left it. Some of the younger generation broke 
over the peace limit, organized themselves as " Free Qua- 
kers," entered the American Army, and were still maintain- 
ing their separate organization as late as 1798. In the 
gloomy aspect of affairs which greeted them at the begin- 
ning of the struggle, Friends were induced to appoint rep- 
resentatives from New England, Virginia and North Caro- 
lina to attend the Philadelphia Yearly Meeting in 1776 to 
consult on the condition of their affairs, and this course 
was followed during the most of the war/ The war 
brought much distress and suffering to Friends. In this 
extremity the noble character of the creed of Friends stands 
out in bold relief. Many thousand pounds were raised in 
England to be applied to their aid. During the time of 
actual hostilities this was applied mostly to Friends in New 
England and the Carolinas.^ 

It does not appear that Friends during the Revolution 
often acted inconsistently with their well known peace policy; 
but this policy was a source of weakness to the American 
cause and one of strength to Great Britain. Some Friends 
refused to pay the State levies for war purposes, and, as the 
Continental currency was issued to carry on war, many 
refused to receive it. A minute to this effect was passed 
by the Virginia Yearly Meeting. We are tempted to ask 
how much of the religious and how much of the economic 
element was present here? This action was unfortunate. 
The result was to hasten the decline of the money and 
to throw the influence of the Society on the side of the 
British Government. In 1776 North Carolina Quakers de- 
clined to vote for delegates to attend the convention, but 
left Friends to take the paper bills or not. In 1778 they 
were in doubt whether they were able " to pay the taxes 
demanded under the present unsettled state of affairs." In 
1780 they refused to pay the tax in provisions. There was 

'Bowden, TT., 807. 

*Iiow(it^n, II., Srif). quoting epistles of Phila. Meeting for Suffer- 
ings and Gough MSS. 



Quakers and their Testimony against War. 185 

no general minute on part of American Friends forbidding 
their members to receive the Continental currency, but the 
Virginia Yearly Meeting made such an order. That they 
were much more bitter and determined in the matter of 
the tax in Virginia is shown by a letter of Robert Pleasants 
to Thomas Nicholson in 1779, in which he argues against 
the payment of the tax, blames the Eastern Quarter of 
North Carolina for paying, and praises the Western Quar- 
ter for refusing to pay. This quarterly meeting also wrote 
to Bush River Monthly Meeting to warn its members not 
to meddle in politics, for it was learned that some had voted 
for delegates to the convention, »• 

But Friends were not spared when these States were 
invaded. Between the requisitions of the Americans and 
the thefts and robberies of the British and Tories, there 
was small chance for them to escape serious damage. 

As soon as the war vv^as over Friends accepted the re- 
sults. But they had never been blindly obedient to des- 
potism. They had steadily resisted it in England; they 
did the same in America. Believing, as they do, in 
the common brotherhood of man, they have been of ne- 
cessity democratic, and have been found in every question 
on the side which sought to elevate the lower classes. 
They were, then, logically and historically, on the side of 
the colonists in the question at issue. They differed from 
them in regard to the method that should be employed to 
attain the end. 

Their property was sometimes seized for the commis- 
sariat, and Friends were sometimes arrested on the charge 
of being unfriendly to the American cause. In August, 
1777, certain papers containing a set of questions relating 
to the American Army, and some other notes that might 
assist the English, were found on Staten Island, N. J., by 
General Sullivan and sent to Congress. This body re- 
solved at once to arrest persons who were notoriously 
inimical to American freedom, and directed that the records 
and papers of the Meetings for Sufferings in the several 



ISG Soutlirni Qiiaket's and Slavery. 

States be sceured and transmitted to Congress. In Sep- 
tember, 1777, twenty Quakers of Philadelphia were arrested 
by the Council of Pennsylvania on the charge of having 
given information to the British, and seventeen of them were 
hurried down to Winchester, \'a., as prisoners of war. 
The original charges seem to have been utterly baseless, 
and the proceedings against them were arbitrary and unjust, 
for they were given no opportunity to defend themselves; 
they were refused a hearing, and the writ of liabcas corpus, 
issued in their behalf by the Chief Justice of Pennsylvania, 
was disregarded. Further, they were forced to support 
themselves while thus involuntarily removed from their 
regular occupations, and the feelings of the community 
were poisoned against them. This injustice was all done 
on the basis of certain papers pretending to come from 
" Spanktown Yearly Meeting," which bear immistakable 
evidence of being the work of one who was wholly ignorant 
of the phraseology peculiar to Quakers. 

The histor}^ of the arrest had preceded the prisoners. 
" The inhabitants in this part of the country are," writes 
the county lieutenant of Frederick, " in general, much ex- 
asperated against the whole society of Quakers. The peo- 
ple were taught to suppose these people were Tories, and 
the leaders of the Quakers, and two more offensive stig- 
mas, in their estimation, could not be fixed upon men; in 
short, they determined not to ])crmit them to remain in 
Winchester, for fear of their holding a correspondence with 
the Friends of the adjoining counties." He says, further, 
that this sentiment was manufactured to keep them from 
holding such communication, and so strong was the feeling 
that on the day after their arrival, about thirty armed men 
collected at their lodgings and demanded their immediate 
removal. The question was settled for the time by the 
Quakers agreeing not to leave their house. But this feeling 
of fear and hostility soon subsided, the people became more 
friendly, and not only allowed them to remain, but admin- 
istered to their comforts, granted them the freedom of the 



Quakers and their Testimony against War. 1S7 

surrounding section of country, and attended their meet- 
ings. They were released in April, 1778/ 

But in the midst of war and war's alarms, Friends did not 
forget their work of love. In February, 1778, Joshua 
Brown of Pennsylvania and Achilles Douglass of Virginia 
visited the meetings in Virginia, passed through North 
Carolina, proceeded south, and were arrested at Ninety Six 
in South Carolina. They were tendered the oath of alle- 
giance to South Carolina, which they refused to take, and, 
refusing also to give security in i 10,000 to leave the State, 
were imprisoned. But this was not grievous, for Friends 
from a settlement twenty or thirty miles distant visited 
them. They held meetings regularly, first in the prison 
and then in the court-house; many persons attended, and 
" ability was given to preach the gospel with acceptance." 
From Ninety Six they were taken to Charleston; they were 
not released, but were given liberty to visit the meeting at 
Bush River, which had about one hundred and thirty 
families connected with it. In October, 1778, they were 
released by act of Assembly.^ 

Again, in 1781, Abel Thomas and Thomas Winston trav- 
eled through North Carolina and South Carolina into Georgia 
on a religious visit. They passed through both armies. They 
met with rough treatment at times, but were allowed to 
go on. General . Greene himself had been bred a Quaker 
and wrote them: "I shall be happy if your ministry shall 
contribute to the establishment of morality and brotherly 
kindness among the people, than which no country wanted 
it more."' T • ■ ^^J, 

After the beginning of the Revolution the first matter 
in Virginia that related in any way to the Quakers was 
the first ordinance of Convention of July, 1775, which ex- 
empted " all clergymen and dissenting ministers " from serv- 
ing in the militia. But no dissenting minister could avail 

' Gilpin's Exiles in. Virginia. 

' Janney, III., 466-467 ; Cooper, IV., 452. 

' Journal of Abel Thomas, in Friends'' Lihi^ary, XIII., 474-478. 



188 Southern Qualcers and Slavery. 

himself of this privilege unless he had been '' duly licensed 
by the general court, or the society to which he belongs/' ' 
This law met a part of the complaint of the Quakers; it 
recognized their religious standing and gave their ministers, 
and other dissenting ministers, the same legal exemption 
as had always been granted to the clergymen of the Church 
of England, This is the first .step in the movement which 
led up to the sixteenth section of the Virginia Bill of 
Rights. 

The act of May, 1776, seems to have been a sort of con- 
tinuation of the act of 1766. It required Quakers and 
]\renonists to be enlisted in the militia, but exempted them 
from attending musters/ The act of May, 1777, went 
backward. It makes no exception in their favor in regard 
to enrollment, mustering or drafting/ This was probably 
an oversight, for the new law of October, 1777, recruiting 
the Virginia regiments, discharges all Quakers and Menon- 
ists taken by draft from personal service, but provides that 
a number of substitutes, equal to the number thus dis- 
charged, be secured and paid for by a general levy on the 
Society as a whole, and this levy was to be collected by dis- 
tress/ There was the same provision in the laws passed in 
1780 and 1781/ We see in these laws an evident effort to 
recognize the peculiar views of Friends, but the need of 
their services is stronger and still keeps them under disabili- 
ties. 

The law of May, 1782, relieved Quakers from personal 
service when drafted, imposing instead a penalty of four- 
teen pounds, which might be collected by distress/ The law 
of October, 1782, relieved them from personal service, but 
the county lieutenant was required to appoint a suitable 
person " to procure a substitute upon the best terms pos- 
sible." This amount was to be collected from the property 
of the drafted Quaker; if he could not pay, from the Society/ 

' Henintr. TX.. 28. 89. 'Ibid.. TX.. 139. 

^ TIml., IX., 267 ef seq. 'Jbiil.. IX., IMS. 

^Jlnd., X.. 261. 314, 334. 417. « Jbid.. XL. 18. 
'Ibid.. XI., 175. 



Quakers and their TeHtimonij against War. 189 

Unfortunately we have very imperfect data for determin- 
ing what the conduct of Virginia Friends was during this 
period. But we know that Friends were exhorted to be 
faithful and firm in their testimony; that a committee was 
appointed to consult with those who were under trial for 
their faith, to comfort and encourage them; that, following 
the lead of Pennsylvania, they refused in 1779 to pay the 
taxes for the support of the war. 

North Carolina Quakers seem to have remained pretty 
faithful to their peace policy during the whole war, and 
carried it to the extreme of asking if it was lawful for them 
" to pay taxes demanded under the present unsettled state 
of affairs." But it (^oes not appear that they ever went 
to the extreme of refusing to pay these taxes or to take the 
State issues of script; although Western Quarterly Meet- 
ing — the foreign element — declared in 1778 that Friends 
could not pay the war tax. The refusal of the Virginia 
Quakers, when in former wars they had paid their taxes 
without inquiring into their destination, at once caused them 
to play into the hands of England. 

As we have seen in an earlier chapter, John Archdale, the 
Quaker Governor of the Carolinas, enforced the military 
law in South Carolina, but exempted Friends from its pro- 
visions. Under his administration they were exempted 
from all military requirements. After the arrival of Sir 
Nathaniel Johnson in 1702 their fortunes were changed. 
In 1703 a military law was passed which required that " all 
inhabitants " between sixteen and sixty should be armed 
and drilled. If persons refused they were subject to a fine 
of los. for the first offense and 20s. for each subsequent one. 
This could be collected by distress. Among the exempts 
were " ministers of the gospel," ' which term was changed 
to "the clergy" in 1747, and to "all licensed clergymen, 
belonging to any established church in this state," in 1778- 
This law underwent various changes and modifications 

' Cooper, IX., 617-621. 'Ibid., IX.. 673. 



190 ^uullicrii (^iialicrs and ISlaceri/. 

from time to time, but these were matters of detail, not of 
principle. There is no recognition of Quakers in the laws 
passed during the Revolution. The penalty for neglect of 
military duty under the law of 1778 was £500; and Quakers, 
like others, must stand the draft.' So far as I have been 
able to learn, there was no deference at all paid to the pecu- 
liar views of the Quakers. I have not found any mention 
of the Society whatever in the South Carolina laws. 

In the case of Georgia, Quakers report to the North Caro- 
lina Yearly Aleeting that under the laws of the State, passed 
in 1777 and 1778, they were exempted from military service 
if properly reported. In 1775 they complain that they 
" have been misrepresented in their conduct respecting the 
said contest," and in 1780 complain of being " opprest by 
the violent behavior of the militia of these parts and been 
illegally deprived of both Liberty and Property." An ac- 
count of the amount thus lost was to be secured and sent 
to the monthly meeting, and in the same year Quakers 
write to Georgia from New Garden, N. C, and exhort them 
to stand fast in their refusals to comply with requisitions 
and demands for war needs. But notwithstanding all ex- 
hortations, quite a number of Quakers in all of these three 
States enlisted in the American Army, while others carried 
aims for personal defense; some were disowned for these 
actions. 

The North Carolina Quakers seem to have been more 
uniformly non-combatants. They had sufifered somewhat 
from military fines in the colonial period. In the Revolu- 
tion this became heavier. In 1778 they paid £1,213:9:2 in 
military fines, in 1779 it amounted to £2,152:5:10, and in 
1780 to £841:15:7, "good money, silver dollars at eight 
shillings"; 1781, to £4,134 and upwards; 1782, £741; 1783, 
£718. In 1781 Western Quarterly Meeting reports £2.148 8s. 
and £675 1 8s. as the amounts taken from them by the 
American and British armies respectively. But that these 
forced drafts on the resources of the Quakers did not im- 

' Cooper, IX., 674. 



(Juakeri!; and their Testimony against War. 191 

poverish them is evident from the fact that when Rich Square 
Monthly Meeting decided in 1781 to raise £40 in gold and 
silver, one man, Robert Peellc, agreed to advance the whole 
amount. 

Another source of trouble to the Quakers in the Revolu- 
tion was the oath of allegiance. This was provided for by 
the Virginia Assembly of May, 1777. The affirmation was 
allowed, in accord with the terms of the act of 1705, in lieu 
of the oath. Those who now refused to take the test were 
disarmed and compelled to attend musters without arms. 
They were further deprived of electoral privileges, could 
not hold office, sue for debts, serve as jurors, or buy lands, 
tenements or hereditaments.^ But in none of the Southern 
States were they forbidden to teach school because of this 
refusal, as was done in Pennsylvania.^ 

The question came up before the Virginia Yearly Meet- 
ing of 1778. It was decided that "it would be proper for 
the Yearly Meeting to direct the quarterly and monthly 
meetings, to watch over, and caution their members not 
to join with or engage in any measures which may be car- 
ried on by war and bloodshed, or take any test that may 
bind them to join with either party whilst the contest sub- 
sists " ; and if any have taken the tests, they are to be labored 
with to convince them of the inconsistency of their actions; 
if they persist and refuse to condemn their action, they are 
to be excluded from being active in the discipline, and are 
not to be appointed to any service in the Society. 

North Carolina provided for an oath of allegiance in 1777 
also.' This State also granted Quakers the affirmation. 
The penalty for refusing the oath was expulsion from the 
province. Like Virginia Friends, they declined, substan- 
tially, to take this test, but they expressed * their position in 
a much happier and more forcible style: " As we have always 

'Hening, IX., 221. This law was repealed, May, 1783, Hening, 
XI. 252. 
= Bowden, II. , 332. ' Iredell's Revisal, 285. 
* Letter to the Assembly in 1777. 



192 Southern Quakers and Slavery. 

declared that we believed it to be unlawful for us, to be 
active in war, and fighting with carnal weapons, and as 
we conceive that the proposed affirmation approves of the 
present measures, which are carried on and supported by 
military force, we cannot engage or join with either party 
therein; being bound by our principles to believe that the 
setting up and pulling down kings and governments, is 
God's peculiar prerogative, for causes best known to him- 
self; and that it is not our work or business to have any 
hand or contrivance therein, nor to be busybodies in mat- 
ters above our station; so that as we cannot be active either 
for or against any power that is permitted, or set over us 
in the above respects: We hope that you will consider our 
principles a much stronger security to any state than any 
test that can be required of us; as we now are and shall be 
innocent and peaceable in our several stations and condi- 
tions under this present state;. and for conscience sake are 
submissive to the laws, in whatever they may justly require, 
or by peaceably suffering what is or may be inflicted upon 
us, in matters for which we cannot be active for conscience 
sake." 

In 1778 it was decided to labor with those who took the 
" affirmation of allegiance or fidelity," in love and tender- 
ness; if they remained stubborn they were not to be con- 
sidered active members. 

We do not know that the letter of the law was ever used 
against them. The Assembly seems to have granted them 
some favors in the matter of the test, for in 1779 we find 
them expressing their thanks to the Assembly, " and do 
humbly request that you will be pleased to grant us the 
privileges that we have hitherto enjoyed until proof be made 
that our behavior manifests us to be unworthy thereof and 
we hope our conduct will always demonstrate our gratitude." 
They remained faithful to their testimony, however, and 
concluded that they could not " consistently take any test 
while things remain unsettled and still to be determined 
by militia force." 



Quakers and their Tesliiiioiii/ ayaiimt War. 103 

In 1780 we find an act securing them their lands against 
various persons who souglit to possess themselves of these 
on the plea that the Quakers under the law, if not sent out 
of the State, were deprived of the benefit and protection of 
the laws and disabled from prosecuting or defending any 
suit either in law or equity/ We may conclude then that 
in North Carolina they were released from the required test. 

In 1783, "Friends taking under consideration a former 
minute of this meeting, which was a prohibition of taking 
any test to either of the powers while contending, do ap- 
prehend that the said order is not now in force, but that 
Friends are now at liberty either to take or refuse the said 
test according to the clear freedom of their own minds. 
And as the present form of alBrmation prescribed by law is 
not easy and satisfactory to some friends, therefore the fol- 
lowing form is agreed to in this meeting (to wit) I, A. B., 
do solemnly and sincerely declare and affirm that I will 
truly and faithfully demean myself as a peaceable subject 
of the independent state of North Carolina, and will be sub- 
ject to the powers and authorities that are or may be es- 
tablished for the good government thereof not inconsistent 
with the constitution, either by yielding an active or a pas- 
sive obedience thereto and that I will not abet or join the 
enemies of this state by any means, in any conspiracy what- 
soever against the said state or the United States of Am- 
erica," and the same was established " with some small 
additions" by the Assembly of 1784.' 

In South Carolina the test of allegiance, e-tablished by 
the Assembly in February, 1777, provided for affirmation 
instead of an oath.'' Those who refused to take the oath were 
to be transported, and if they returned, were to suffer death 
as traitors. The severity of this law insured its defeat. 
In March, 1778, a new law for the enforcement of the test 

' Iredell, 400. 

2 See Iredell, 505, 541, for the law as finally adopted for Quakers 
and others. 

^Cooper, I., 135. 



194: Southern Quakers and Slavery. 

was passed, which imposed on those who refused to take 
it the same disabilities as were imposed by the Virginia 
statutes.' We have seen what the sentiment of the North 
Carolina Yearly Meeting, to which the South Carolina meet- 
ings belonged, was on the question of allegiance. It is more 
probable that the South Carolina Quakers, few as they were, 
preferred to sufifer under the law rather than sacrifice their 
testimony. 

In Georgia also Friends refused to take the oath of alle- 
giance. I have found no references to them in this connec- 
tion in the laws of this State. They had been permitted to 
affirm as early as 1756. 

3. — A/Ur tJie Revohition. 

The question of the testimony against war becomes un- 
important in North Carolina after the Revolution. It does 
not appear that Quakers ever served in the American armies 
in that State, that they took the oath of allegiance, or that 
they suffered serious inconvenience from their refusal. On 
the 29th of December, 1785, a new militia act was passed, 
which exempted all Quakers from attendance on private or 
general musters." This clause was re-enacted in the new 
militia law passed in 1786,^ and with the enactment of this 
law Quakers obtained all their demands in the matter of 
military affairs. But it is probable that Friends suffered 
more or less in North Carolina in the war of 181 2. They 
had renewed their testimony against militar}- training in 
1799. In 1813 they repeated their warning and prepared 
a protest against the war tax, but it does not appear that 
they refused to pay it. 

The North Carolina law of 1786 remained substantially 
unchanged until 1830. Chapter twenty-eight of the laws of 
that year repealed the clause exempting Quakers and others 
from bearing arms because of religious scruples. It pro- 

'Coojjer. I.. M7, HS. "Laws 1785, cli. I. -Iredell. 591. 



Quakers and their Testimony against War. 195 

vided that such persons should be exempt on the annual 
payment of a fine of $2.50, which was to go to the literary 
fund. The Quakers expostulated against this law. They 
did not object to a tax for schools, but in this form it " is 
a groundless and an oppressive demand. It is a muster 
fine in disguise and violates the very principle which it 
seemed to respect." Public opinion forced the repeal of 
this law in 1832, and with this exception I have not found 
that Friends suffered in North Carolina from military laws 
from the Revolution to the Civil War.^ 

As already stated, I have been able to find the name 
Quaker nowhere in the exhaustive index to Cooper's Sfaf- 
iites at Large of South Carolina. 

The Georgia military law of 1792 provided that Quakers 
should be exempted from service on producing a certificate 
from a Quaker meeting of their being botia fide Quakers 
and paying an extra tax of 25 per cent in addition to their 
general tax. This was re-enacted in the supplementary act 
of 1793.' 

^n these States Quakers seem to have remained, theoret- 
ically, tuider disabilities; but from the fact that they no- 
where speak of sufferings to the North Carolina Yearly 
Meeting, we may conclude that these disabilities were in 
reality very small — that they were really suffered to go 
without performance of military duty. 

Their experience in Virginia was by no means so pleas- 
ant. In that State they continued under disabilities longer. 
The law of May, 1784, exempted Quakers from attending 
private or general musters provided they produced testi- 
monials showing their affiliation with the Society.^ The law 
of October, 1785, renewed these privileges.* The new law 
of October, 1792, exempted all Quakers," but the law of De- 

'See Laws of 1803, ch. 18; Laws of 1830, ch. 28, and Laws of 
1832, ch. 4. In 1829 Friends of Core Sound found that some of 
their members had been furnishing materials for " warlike fortifi- 
cations now in building " — probably Fort Macon, N. C. 

'■'R. and G. Watkins' Revisal, 467, 524. 

sHening, XI., 389. *76id., XII., 24. ^j^^vZ., XIIL, 343. 



196 Sitiithcni (jKdkerfi and i^lavery. 

cenibcr 2, 1793, exempted Quakers and Menonists only 
on condition that they lield certificates inchoating- tliat they 
were regular members, and furnished "' a substitute for 
such service, to be approved of by the commanding officer 
of the company."" The law of January 23, 1799, repealed 
all earlier laws exempting Quakers and ^vlenonists from 
militia service.' But the law of February 4, 1806, pro- 
vided that they were not to be fined for refusing to receive 
public arms.' 

In Virginia there were instances in 1814, and probably 
in 1 81 5, when Friends were fined and imprisoned for not 
bearing arms, but the officers were said to be very friendly 
to them, so far as the case would admit. About 181 6 they 
presented to the Legislature of ATrginia a protest against 
the then existing militia law, in which, and in an accom- 
panying letter, Benjamin Bates presents a remarkably strong 
plea for release from this species of discrimination. The edi- 
tor of Niles's Register, which reprints on November 30, 
1 81 6, the petition and letter, says that it perhaps " forms 
a body of the ablest arguments that have ever appeared in 
defense of certain principles held by this people." * This 
petition had, unfortunately, no eff'ect. But there is no men- 
tion of Quakers in any way in the later codes of Virginia, 
and we might conclude that the law was allowed to die by 
non-enforcement. But such was not the case. In 1801 a 
coinplaint was made in the Yearly Meeting that some 
Friends were acting in a military cai)acity; in 1804 the 
meeting directed that Friends make a report of their suffer- 
ings under the militia law. In 1821 the meeting discussed 
the propriety of addressing the Legislature on the subject. 
This was not done. We hear no more of sufferings after 
they became a part of Baltimore Yearly Meeting. 

' Collections of Acts, 1814, 436. 

« Ilml , r)43. 

Wnllcctioi, of Laws. 1808. II.. 109: see also act of J;in. 21, 1807, 
wliich confirms this. Ibid., II., 143. 

'See also l-'riendii' Miscellani/, VII , and same in Niles's Register, 
VII., 90, supplement. 



Quakers aitd their Testimony af/ainst W(ir. 197 

To the hardness of the law of distress the officers added 
by taking more. The following sufferings were reported: 





Demaiidcfl. 


Taken. 


1807 


$287.03 


$378.16 


I8I0 


262.50 


388.97 


I8II 


i70-59i 


405-65 


I8I3 




401.85 


I8I4 


111.50 


180.30 


I8I6 


1 ,622.02 


2,444.09 


I8I7 


61.86 


69.00 


I8I8 


218.73 


268.35 


I8I9 


126.75 


IbO.75 


1820 


94-50 


145-45 


1823 


185.69 


247-47 


1824 


61.34 


107.42 


1825 


106.11 


167.77 


1826 


42.50 


47.00 


1827 


80.25 


109.40 


1829 


99-75 


71-75 


1830 


66.00 


78.30 


I83I 


43-50 


65-75 


1832 


99.00 


104.12I 


1833 


59-25 


100.55 


1840 


23.00 


21.56 


1 841 


64.25 


32-25 


1842 


7.80 




1844 


8.00 


2.50 



CHAPTER IX. 
Southern Quakers and Slavery. 

" Stitch away, thou noble I'ox," wrote Thomas Carlyle, 
" ever}' prick of that httle instrument is pricking into the 
heart of slavery and world worship and the mammon god." 

If it be lawful for us to speak of men of destiny; if men 
are bom to accomplish a certain purpose; if God in His 
wisdom raises up nations to a certain end, then this is true 
of institutions as w^ell. The mission of Quakerism has 
been to the slave. In this struggle Quakers appealed to 
the universal conscience of mankind. Here they ceased to 
be propagandists of faith and became propagandists of ac- 
tion. They announced their opposition to the system when 
it had no other opponents, and they steadfastly maintained 
their testimony until its last traces were swept from the 
English-speaking world. 

As early as 1675 William Edmundson wrote an epistle 
to Friends in Virginia, Maryland and other parts of Am- 
erica, in which he denounced the holding of slaves.^ In 1693 
George Keith published his testimony against slavery in a 
pamphlet having Bradford's imprint and the title: An 
exhortation and caution to Friends concerning buying 
and keeping of negroes, given forth by M. M. of Phila- 
delphia. In 1699 we find Thomas Story and other Friends 
taking an interest in the slaves. Pie found some of them 
in Friends' families, some were convinced of the Truth, 
and in other places he urged the necessity of freeing 
those who had been baptized." W^illiam Penn took the 
same view of slavery and matle attempts to improve the 
condition of the slaves by legal enactments. As early as 
1688 German Friends in Germantown, Pa., issued a protest 



Janney. III., 178. ■ Ibid., III., G6-67. 



Southern Quakers and Slavery. 199 

against slavery, which was sent up to the Yearly Meeting, 
but " It was adjudged not to be so proper for this meeting 
to give a positive Judgement in the Case, It having so Gen- 
eral a Relation to many other Parts." In 1696 the Yearly 
Meeting advised " that Friends be careful not to encourage 
the bringing in of any more negroes." In 1727 the London 
annual epistle censured those Friends who engaged in the 
importation of slaves. With these points as a basis, the 
struggle was kept up in the northern colonies. It worked 
a little faster in New England, and slave-holding was made 
a disownable offense about 1770. In 1755 Philadelphia 
Yearly Meeting reiterated its former advice against the im- 
portation or buying of slaves, and in 1776 made slave-own- 
ing a disownable offense. Many individual Friends had 
been led to manumit their slaves. One of the most earnest 
in this anti-slavery crusade was Warner MifBin, who was 
born on the Eastern Shore of Virginia about 1745, and 
from his fourteenth year began to consider this question. 
By 1775 he had advanced far enough to manumit his own 
slaves, induced his father to do the same, and even paid his 
slaves for their services.' 

This question was a cause of trouble, more or less, to all 
Friends traveling in the South. We have the tocsin sounded 
in 1754 by Samuel Fothergill and Joshua Dixon, who 
landed on the shores of the Delaware in the autumn of that 
year and traveled south. "Maryland is poor; the gain of 
oppression, the price of blood is upon that province — I 
mean their purchasing, and keeping in slavery, negroes." 
Friends had here decreased in numbers, had mixed with 
the world and were unfaithful "to their testimony against 
the hireling priests." In various parts the ven,^ appearance 
of Truth had been almost destroyed. There was a great 
scarcity of ministers. " I know not more than two in the 
province . . . and they were neither negro-keepers nor priest- 

' Janney , III. , 178, 317, 426-488. For a summary of the early efforts 
of Friends and others in this matter see the early chapters of 
Ciarkson's Histor-y of the Abolition of the Slave Trade. 



200 SoiifJicfii (Jiiiikcis <in(l Sl<ircri/. 

payers. This very much describes also the state of \'ir- 
ginia. only I think I may add, the visitation of Divine truth 
seems more effectually received in various parts of this 
province than the former, and a spring of living ministry 
to edification; ])ut here the youth are those whom the King 
of heaven delights to honor. North Carolina is the next. 
There are a great many Friends in a part of it contiguous 
to Virginia [Albemarle]; some truly valuable Friends, but 
few; yet many who offer a sacrifice which costs them noth- 
ing. The largest body of Friends here seems to me the 
weakest; they have been a lively people, but negro purchas- 
ing comes more and more in use among them." There 
were, however, " some brethren and true members ingrafted 
into the A'ine; though worldly-mindedness and lukewarm- 
ness have seized upon many." South Carolina had only 
two meetings. In Charleston " there are few who bear our 
name and fewer who deserve it." ^ 

Slavery was the central question in the life of John Wool- 
man. He visited Virginia and Carolina for the second time 
in 1757. He complained bitterly of the small care shown 
the slaves in their social relations. The Virginia Yearly 
Meeting had recently considered the quen,- of the Phila- 
delphia Yearly Meeting: " Are there any concerned in the im- 
portation of negroes, or buying them after imported?" 
Their answer to this query was unsatisfactory, for they had 
altered it to: "Are there any concerned in the importation 
of negroes or buying them to trade in?" This admitted 
the right to buy them for their own use and was displeasing 
to Woolman. He spoke against the change; it was not 
altered, although some " manifested a concern in regard to 
taking more care in the education of their negroes." Their 
action weighed heavily on his spirits. It appeared to him 
" that through the prevailing of the spirit of this world, the 
minds of many were brought to an inward desolation ; and 
instead of the spirit of meekness, gentleness and heavenly 

' Memoir of Fothergill, 282-283. 



Southern Qiialcers and Slavery. 201 

wisdom, ... a spirit of fierceness, and the love of dominion 
too generally prevailed." He wrote an epistle to the new 
settlement of Friends at New Garden and Cane Creek against 
slavery, and found trouble because of this subject in the 
meetings in eastern North Carolina.' 

The history of slavery agitation among the Virginia Quakers 
divides itself into three pretty distinct periods: The first, 
closing in 1765, we may call the period of amelioration. It 
took the form of more attention to bodily comforts. It 
was inspired as much, doubtless, by economic as philan- 
thropic motives. It does not seem to have looked directly 
to liberation. (2) The period of emancipation, closing prac- 
tically with the century. (3) The second period of amelior- 
ation, when the attention of Friends was drawn to the con- 
dition of the liberated blacks, and when efforts were made 
to improve their economic and intellectual condition, and 
to encourage masters, who were not Friends, in the work 
of emancipation. 

The first mention of slavery that I have found in the an- 
nals of the Southern Quakers occurs in 1722, when the 
Virginia Yearly Meeting propounded the query: "Are all 
Friends clear of being concerned in the importation of 
slaves or purchasing them for sale, do they use those well 
they are possessed of, and do they endeavor to restrain 
from Vice, and to instruct them in the principles of the 
christian religion?" 

The next is in 1739, when the sam.e meeting sent a note 
to their brethren in North Carolina, inquiring if they used 
their negroes well, etc. In 1740 the Yearly Meeting rec- 
ommended to those who hold slaves '' to use them as fellow 
creatures " and not to make " too rigorous an exaction of 
all their labour." It was also decided that Friends could 
not go patroling to keep blacks in subjection. 

Woolman's position and presence precipitated some dis- 
cussion. In 1758 there is a complaint in the \^irginia meet- 

' Journal, 73-78. 



202 ,'<uulli( rii (Juakcrs and iSlavery. 

ing that some were not careful to teach Christianity to their 
negroes, and the X'irginia disciphne of that year directs 
" that none amongst us be Concerned in importing, buy- 
ing, selhng, Holding or Overseeing slaves, and that all 
bear a faithful testimony against these practices." In 1759 
we have the first of a long series of complaints, continuing 
as long as the Virginia Yearly Aleeting existed, that there 
was a general deficiency in the education of the negroes. 
It is noticeable that Southern Friends manifested much 
anxiety for the education of the negro from very early times. 

In 1760 the meeting asked: "Are all Friends clear of 
being concerned in the importation of slaves, or purchas- 
ing them for sale, do they use those well which they are 
possessed of, and do they endeavor to restrain them from 
vice, and to enstruct them in the principles of the chris- 
tian religion." 

Again in 1764: " It having been weightily recommended 
in this meeting to Friends who are possessed of negros, 
impartially to consider their situation; and as the reports 
from the quarterly meeting state there is a general defi- 
ciency in most places in instructing them in the principles 
of the christian Religion, it is the weighty concern of this 
meeting earnestly to recommend to the quarterly and 
monthly meetings, to have that unhappy people more im- 
mediately under their care and notice; and that they not 
only advise their masters and mistresses to use some en- 
deavors towards their education, but also make a diligent 
inspection into their usage clothing and feeding, earnestly 
desiring that their state and station may more and more 
become the particular care and concern of each individual." 

In January, 1765, Benjamin Ferris traveled in the South 
with William Reckitt, who was on a second visit. It is 
easy to recognize the key-note. " We came to Curies, and 
lodged at a Friend's house, where riches, negroes and gran- 
deur abound, which makes very poor fare for a christian 
mind; but he. was hospitable and kind to us . . . Had a 
meeting at Black Creek. . . . Here I had an opportimity 



Southern Quakers and iSlavery. 203 

of very close conversation on the subject of slave keeping 
with a Friend who at times appeared in public by way of 
ministry .... at Somerton a small meeting, and, like most 
others, poor and low. Indeed how can it be otherwise, 
while oppression is continued, and the gain thereof coveted 
after! ... I have been at times much oppressed on account 
of Friends in this province [North Carolina] and in Vir- 
ginia, so far countenancing the slave trade, as to hold 
those excused who purchase them; and have endeavored 
... to impress on the minds of Friends the necessity of 
shutting the door against the increase of slaves among 
them by purchase." The state of the church in Carolina 
was low, " so, that the prospect at present is very discourag- 
ing and painful; and the wound seems so deep that I have 
been ready to conclude it is incurable in the present gener- 
ation." ' 

The activity of Virginia Friends was hastened and 
turned more directly toward emancipation by the visit of 
John Griffith, another anti-slavery apostle, who was among 
the meetings in Virginia and Carolina in 1765. After at- 
tending most of the meetings he remarks : " Alas ! great 
deadness, insensibility, and darkness were felt to prevail 
amongst them; close labor, in great plainness, was used, 
shewing the cause thereof; amongst other things, that 
which appeared none of the least was their keeping negroes 
in perpetual slaver}^ I was often concerned to use plain- 
ness in families where I went in respect to this matter, 
and am satisfied truth will never prosper amongst them, 
nor any others, who are in the practice of keeping this race 
of mankind in bondage. It is too manifest to be denied, 
that the life of religion is almost lost where slaves are very 
numerous; and it is impossible it should be otherwise, the 
practice being as contrary to the spirit of Christianity as 
light is to darkness." ' 

From this time Virginia Friends were active. In 1766, 

^Journal, in Friends^ Miscellany, XII., 253-26^. 
-Joiir/mZ, 379-380. 



204 tSouthctn (JiKilrrs and Shirvr}/. 

" it having been. weightily proposed to this meeting to en- 
deavor to put a stop to the further purchases of negroes, 
after soHd consideration it is concluded to recommend the 
subject by an epistle to quarterly and monthly meetings for 
them to consider and report their sense thereon to the 
next Yearly Meeting." 

Cedar Creek Monthly ^Meeting seems to have taken the 
lead. At a meeting held in December, 1766, they appointed 
a committee to investigate. It reported in May, 1767, 
" agreeable to a minute of the last yearly meeting con- 
cerning the slave trade, together with the unhappy conse- 
quences, this meeting has collected the sentiments of most 
of the Friends belonging to the same which is willing and 
desirous that some steps be taken to relieve those people 
from that perpetual slaverv^ which they are now involved 
in, and think that George Fox's advice to Friends in Bar- 
badoes, and the advice in the printed epistle from London 
of 1758, seems the most likely to take effect." 

But when the matter came up for consideration in the 
Yearly Meeting of 1767: "By answers from the Quarterly 
Meetings to the minute and epistle from last Yearly Meet- 
ing respecting the putting a stop to the further purchase 
of negros, it appears that Friends are divided in their senti- 
ments concerning the steps to be immediately taken in that 
important matter, which being solidly considered, and several 
weighty remarks made thereon, it is left for further con- 
sideration at the next sitting of this meeting." Friends 
were requested not to encumber themselves with further 
purchases. All were encouraged to treat and clothe their 
slaves well, also to allow them to hire their time and to 
pay them wages as servants. 

In 1768 it was reported to the Yearly ^^leeting that 
Friends were for the most part clear " of importing or buy- 
ing negros." Some Friends were also willing to release 
their slaves if way could be made for it. It was agreed 
that no Friends from this time should purcliase a negro or 
other slave without being guilty of a breach of the dis- 



Southern Quakers and Slavery. 205 

cipline. In 1767 the Isle of Wight Monthly Meeting passed 
a minute that no Friend should purchase a slave without 
leave of the monthly meeting, and in February, 1769, 
Cedar Creek Monthly Meeting said: " Tliis meeting hav- 
ing considered the unhappy state of negroes and it ap- 
pears that Friends present are unanimously agreed that 
some steps may be taken to relieve them from slavery as 
the quarterly and yearly meeting may point out." In 
March, 1770, James Crew was disowned for buying a slave. 
In December, 1772, Shadrack Stanley was disowned for the 
same offense, and twelve copies of Benezet's treatise on 
slaver}^ were ordered to be distributed to persons in authority. 

In 1 769 it was reported that some Friends were burthened 
with the keeping of slaves; the next year the query was 
adopted: " Are Friends clear of importing or buying negro.s, 
or other slaves, and do they use those well which they are 
possessed of, endeavoring to restrain them from vice, and 
to instruct them in the principles of the christian religion?" 
The climax was reached in 1772, when a minute was sent 
down to the monthly meetings that those members were 
to be disowned who purchased slaves " with no other view 
but their ow^n benefit or convenience." 

In the meantime efforts had begun in 1769 toward a 
change in the Virginia law against emancipation. In 1770 
F'riends report that some of their number had discussed 
this law with members of the Assembly, w^ho confessed it 
was bad, but manifested little disposition toward altering it. 

There were free negroes in Virginia as early as 1668. 
The first law in regard to emancipation was passed in 1691, 
and under it no negro or mulatto could be set free under a 
penalty of iio, unless the person freeing him should obli- 
gate to pay for his transportation out of the country within 
six months.^ The law of 1723 provided that no slave should 
be set free thereafter " except for some meritorious services. 
to be adjudged and allowed by the governor and council 

'Hening, III., 87,88. 



y 



20G l^outheru Quakers and Slavery. 

for the time being, and a licence thereupon first had and 
obtained." If slaves were set_ free contrary to this law, it 
was the duty of the church-wardens to sell them and apply 
the money to parish uses.' This law was re-enacted in 
1748.^ 

The Virginia Quakers did not meet with success. The 
law was not repealed, but their efforts had influence, for 
they probably encouraged the Burgesses, who about this 
time appealed to the British crown against slavery.' The 
same year, 1770, w^e find the Standing Committee of North 
Carolina Friends considering " the most prudent steps for 
Friends to take to show their approbation and good liking 
to the prudent steps which the Virginia Burgesses have 
taken in presenting a very pertinent address to the throne 
of Great Britain to put a stop to that most iniquitous prac- 
tice of importing negroes from Africa and making them 
slaves in the colonies." 

In North Carolina there does not seem to have been as 
much discussion of slavery during the early period as in 
Virginia. It first appears in North Carolina in 1758, and 
within fourteen years was the leading question of the day. 
There the fight was longer, was more stubbornly contested, 
resulted in the removal of many negroes from the State, and 
materially influenced the development of Quakerism itself. 
In 1758 the North Carolina Yearly Meeting asks: "Are all 
that have negroes careful to use them well and encourage 
them to come to meetings as much as they reasonably can? " 
At the same time special meetings were provided for them, 
and renewed annually for several vears. 

In 1768 North Carolina Friends interpret the section of 
the discipline in regard to negroes as a prohibition of buying 
negroes to trade upon or of those that traded in them. The 
meeting advises Friends not to buy or sell in any case that 

' HeninK. IV.. 132. 'Ibid., VI.. 112. 

"See this i)etition in C'ollectioitx of Virginia Historical Society, 
VT., 14. In 1770 a number of Virginia gentlemen entered into an 
agreement to import no slaves into Virginia unless they had beerj^ 
twelve months on the continent. 



Southern Quak'ers and Slavery. 207 

r 

can be reasonably 'J, as the "having of negroes is 

become a burden t such as are in possession of them." 
In 1769 Friends wei uneasy about their members purchas- 
ing negroes and desire an absolute prohibition of the traffic, 
but in 1770 we find instead the following query: " Do Friends 
bear witness against the iniquitous practice of importing 
negroes; or, do they refuse to purchase of those who make 
a trade or merchandise of them? Do they use those they 
inherit well," etc. 

In 1772 Friends were not to buy negroes except of 
jU^i^ Friends, -or. to prevent the parting of husband and wife, or 
parent and child, *' or for other reasons " that might be 
approved by the monthly meeting. They were not to sell 
to slave-buyers, and address the Legislature : " Being fully 
convinced in our minds and judgments beyond a doubt or 
scruple, of the great evil and abomination of the importa- 
tion of negroes from Africa: by which iniquitous practice 
great numbers of our fellow creatures with their posterity are 
doomed to perpetual and cruel bondage; without any regard 
being had to their having forfeited their natural right to lib- 
erty and freedom, by any act of their own or consent thereto 
otherwise than by mere force and cruelty, impresses our 
minds with such abhorance and detestation against such 
a practice, in a christian community; where experience fully 
makes it manifest that instead of their embracing true re- 
ligion, piety, and virtue, in exchange for their natural lib- 
erty, that they are become nurseries to pride, and idleness, 
to our youth in such a manner that morality, and true piety, 
is much wounded where slavery abounds; to the great griet 
of true christian minds. 

"And therefore we cannot but invite our fellow subjects; 
and more especially the representatives in Xorth Carolina 
(as much lies at their doors for the good of the people and 
prosperity of the province) to join heartily with their pru- 
dent brethren the burgesses of the colony of Virginia in 
presenting addresses to the throne of Great Britain in order 
to be as eyes to the blind, and mouths to the dumb; and 



^ 



208 Southern QiiaJcers and i>lavery. 

whether it succeeds or n^ i :i\ e the secret satisfac- 

tion in our own minds of ha^ ij.' i; ur best endeavor, to 

ha\e so great a torrent of evil, • ■ lally stopped, at the 
place where it unhappily had the permission to begin." 

From this time on there were individual cases of tender 
conscience among North Carolina Friends. Some masters 
began to desire to free their slaves, and it was agreed that 
this might be done "by applying to thu monthly meeting, 
and likewise advises the monthly meetings to appoint proper 
persons to assist such Friends in drawing instruments of 
writing for that purpose, and likewise to judge whether the 
persons proposed to be set free is able to get their own live- 
lihood, and the clerk is desired to send copies of this judg- 
ment to each monthly meeting." 

In 1775 "Friends of the western c^uarter, being uneasy 
under the consideration of keeping our fellow men in bond- 
age and slavery, desire this meeting may revise the queiy 
relating tliereunto and make such alteration thereon as may 
relieve some distressed minds." 

The year before, 1774, Thomas Nicholson's "Liberty and 
Property " had appeared, in which he urged an alteration 
in the law restraining the freeing of slaves. In the Yearly 
Meeting of 1776, as a result of the work of a committee, / 
some Friends declared their resolution to set their slaves 
free. The Yearly Meeting also " earnestly and affection- 
ately advised " all who held slaves " to dense their hands 
of them as soon as they possibly can." No Friend was 
permitted to buy or sell any slave, or hire any save from 
persons in unity; and "any member of this meeting who 
may hereafter buy, sell or clandestinely assign for hire any 
slaves in such manner as may perpetuate or prolong their 
slavery " was to be testified against. A committee was ap- 
pointed to assist Friends in the case. 

In 1777 the committee "appointed last yearly meeting to 
assist such I'riends as a]ipear disposed to release their ne- 
groes from a state of bondage being called on to render an 
account of the progress made therein, report, that they 



Southern Quakers and Slavery. 209 

found great willingness, even beyond their expectation, to 
promote the work and that a considerable number have 
been set free by those who had them in possession, about 
forty of which have since been taken up and sold in conse- 
quence of an act of assembly passed at Newbern in the 
third or fourth month last (which was after said negroes 
were manumitted) which seems to put a stop to that work 
at present, although they believe several friends who yet 
have negroes in their possession, are very uneasy in remain- 
ing in a practice they are convinced is not consistent with 
justice, or doing as they would be done unto." 

The law of which Friends complain here was " An act 
to prevent domestic insurrections and for other purposes," 
passed in 1777/ It was a re-enactment of the law of 1741. 
The act of 1741, " Concerning servants and slaves," is the 
first one of the kind in North Carolina.' It is itself a tran- 
script of the Virginia law of 1723, with alterations in de- 
tail only. No negro or mulatto slave could be set free on 
any pretence whatsoever, "except for meritorious sendees, 
to be adjudged and allowed of by the county court and 
licence thereupon first had and obtained." If slaves were 
freed otherwise than in accord with this law, the church- 
wardens were instructed to sell them at public vendue if 
found in the province at the expiration of six months. If 
they returned to the province after leaving it they might 
also be sold. The law practically amounted to a permis- 
sion to emancipate, coupled with the requirement to then 
remove them out of the province. 

The law of 1777 re-enacted in substance that of 1741. 
Slaves could be freed only under license from the county 
court for meritorious services. If freed in any other way 
they could be arrested by any freeholder, turned over to 
the sheriff, and kept in jail until the next term of court 
which should order them to be sold. 

Acting under this law, the county courts of Perquimans 

' Iredell, 288. ^ Davis's Revisal, 1773, pp. 75-87, ?56. 



210 Southern Quakers and Slavery. 

and Pasquotank arrested negroes who had been Hberated 
before the act of 1777 and sold them again into slavery. 
Friends claimed that this was an ex-post-facto law, and em- 
ployed a lawyer, paying him £64, to fight the case, ire- 
sumably in the county court. They then carried it to the 
superior, which was, in reality, the supreme court, and paid 
their lawyer £600. They won their case. The superior 
court said the lower court had exceeded its jurisdiction 
and ordered that its proceedings be quashed. But the Leg- 
islature in 1779 came to the relief of the lower court, con- 
firmed the sales they had made, and further authorized the 
county courts to proceed against all slaves who had been thus 
illegally liberated before the passage of the act of 1777 "in 
the same manner as if such slaves had been set free after 
the passage of the same." ' 

The next year the former owners of these slaves presented 
a memorial to the Legislature about this law and declared 
it also ex-post-facto, but the matter does not seem to 
have been pressed. They advanced as arguments for their 
side of the case that many negroes had been manumitted 
in \'irginia since 1775 and had not been resold; but if this 
was the case, it was a matter of pure grace on the part of 
the church-wardens, for the law of 1748 was still in force. 

There was a marked tendency, however, in Mrginia to- 
w^ard emancipation. There was also continued discussion 
among Friends until 1773, when the Yearly Meeting de- 
clares that " it is our clear sense and judgment that we are 
loudly called upon in this time of calamity and close trial 
to minister justice and judgment to black and white, rich 
and poor, and free our hands from any species of oppres- 
sion. . . . We do therefore most earnestly recommend to 
all who continue to withhold from any their just right to 

' Iredell's Revisal, 371. The preamble of this act recites that these 
negroes had been freed after the 16th April, 177."), and before the 
passage of the new act in 1777, '" notwitlistamlinf^ the same was 
expressly contrary to the laws of this state." Reference is had 
here clearly to the law of 17-11. 



Southern Quakers and Slavery. 211 

freedom, as they prize their own present peace and future 
happiness, to clear their hands of this iniquity, by execut- 
ing manumissions for all those held by them in slavery who 
are arrived at full age, and also for those who may yet be 
in their minority, — to take place when the females attain 
the age of eighteen, and the males twenty-one years." ' 

In 1779 they renewed their appeal. Friends who continued 
to own or to hire slaves were to be " admonished and ad- 
vised " to stop. The monthly meetings were again taking 
the lead and urging on the Yearly Meeting. At a monthly 
meeting held in Caroline County, Va., 8th of 5th mo., 
1773: "By a report from Camp Creek preparative meeting- 
it appears the Friends of that meeting are desirous there 
should be a prohibition of Friends hiring negroes; believ- 
ing that practice to be attended with the same covetous 
disposition as the purchasing of them." 

At a monthly meeting held at South River, Va., 20th day 
of 9th mo., 1777: "This meeting appoints William Johnson 
and Christopher Anthony to assist those Friends appointed 
to labor with such Friends as still hold their negroes in 
bondage, to convince them if possible of the evil of that 
practice and its inconsistency with our christian profession." 

A committee was appointed in 1779 to take these things 
into consideration, and without the consent of this com- 
mittee the monthly meeting was not to disown members be- 
cause of the question of slavery. It was suggested also 
that a committee be appointed to assist such as had been 
manumitted, to instruct them in religion, in education, in 
worldly affairs, etc. 

In 1780 it was ordered that those who continued "to 
hold their fellow creatures in bondage " were to " be par- 
ticularly visited and labored with." The committee reported 
progress the next year and was continued; some still held 
them, and such were not to be employed in the services 
of the church. 



'Janney, III., 433. 



212 Southern Quakers and Slavery. 

Finally, way opened to Friends in 1782, when a new law 
on the subject was passed. This law had been introduced 
in 1 78 1, but had been defeated by a combination of its op- 
ponents. The leader of this opposition was Benjamin Har- 
rison. Robert Pleasants remarks in his Letter Book that 
forty of Harrison's negroes had gone off with the British, 
and intimates that this was punishment for his opposition 
to emancipation. 

The law of 1782 gave all slave-owners the power to eman- 
cipate by will after death or by acknowledging the will 
while still alive, in open court, provided they agreed to sup- 
port all the aged, infirm and young persons thus set at 
liberty.' 

This was the beginning of the end. The great body of 
Friends did not hesitate when the law allowed emancipa- 
tion and protected those emancipated. The Yearly Meet- 
ing had appointed a committee of visitation in 1779 whose 
duty it was to visit and labor with those members who de- 
clined to emancipate. The committee reported progress 
from year to year; many were persuaded; some were refrac- 
tory and held back for a time. In 1784 the Upper Quarterly 
Meeting said: "It appears to be the unanimous sense and 
judgment of the Yearly Meeting that the monthly meetings 
should extend further care to their members who hold 
slaves, as they may apprehend may be necessary and where 
such endeavours prove ineffectual they may exclude them 
from the right of membership. ... It also appears by said 
extracts that the education of negroes is very much ne- 
glected, although it is generally believed to be an indispen- 
sable duty, wherefore this meeting recommends this weiglity 
matter to the particular care and notice of the monthly 
meetings, who are requested to send up an account how 
far they have proceeded on this business." 

In 1785 the query took the form: " Do any I'rionds hold 
slaves, and do all bear a faithful testimony against the prac- 



'Hening, XL, 89, 40. 



Southern Quahers and Slaien/. 213 

tice, endeavoring to instruct the negroes under their care 
in the principles of the christian rehgion." 

In 1786 those Friends who acted as overseers of slaves 
on plantations were to be treated as possessing slaves and 
were to be disowned. 

In 1788 it was inserted in the discipline "that none 
amongst us be concerned in importing, buying, selling, hold- 
ing or overseeing slaves, and that all bear a faithful testi- 
mony against the practice." During the same year Cedar 
Creek Monthly Meeting disowned thirteen persons for hold- 
ing slaves, and in some cases where Friends had sold slaves 
they were required to redeem them and restore them to 
liberty. The work of Friends was also strengthened in 
1787 by the visit of Sarah Harrison to the southern meet- 
ings. Her principal work was done in eastern North Caro- 
lina and Virginia. She and her party visited many slave- 
holders. They w^ote manumissions which numerous masters 
were induced to sign, and she gave, no doubt, a strong 
forward impulse to the emancipation movement.^ 

About 1790 an Abolition Society was formed in Virginia. 
One of its leaders and its president was. Robert Pleasants, 
whose interesting and noteworthy Letter Book has been 
mentioned already. This society soon numbered (1791) 
eighty members, and these were not all Quakers. Method- 
ists are mentioned as being particularly prominent in it, 
and the absence of Baptists is noted. In 1791 it sent a 
petition to the Virginia Assembly against slavery. It also 
petitioned Congress in that year, as did the Yearly Meet- 
ing. Pleasants wished to stop the trade from Virginia to 
Africa for slaves. He corresponded with Patrick Henry, 
and quotes him as saying in 1776 that some prominent 
men were in favor of abolishing slavery altogether; he wrote 
to George Washington, Thomas Jefiferson, James Madison, 
St. George Tucker, and others, and obtained a respectful 
hearing from all. He also contributed to the public press 



Memoir, in Friends' Miscellany, XI., 97-216. 



214 ^Southvni Quakers and Slavery. 

of X'irginia on slavery and the slave trade. He urged that 
a law for gradual emancipation be passed, under which 
the children of slaves, born after a certain date, should be 
free. Pleasants lived to hear the encouraging report in 1796 
that there was no complaint of Friends holding slaves when 
they could be lawfully liberated.' 

Robert Pleasants was the son of John Pleasants of Hen- 
rico County. John Pleasants was for many years clerk of 
the Upper Quarterly Meeting, and by will, dated August 
12, 1 771, freed all of his slaves, under limitations partially 
required by law but chiefly dictated by considerations for 
the welfare of the negroes. He desired the emancipation 
of those of his slaves who were thirty years old, of others 
when they should attain that age, and of the issue of all 
at that age. He made provision for the maintenance of 
those above forty-five. Through existing legal restrictions 
the testament was inoperative, and the slaves remained in 
the possession of his heirs until 1800, when by a decree of 
the High Court of Chancer}^ of Virginia, under date of 
Alarch 19, the freedom of several hundred of the slaves orig- 
inally freed, and of their issue, was confirmed." 

Robert Pleasants died on April 4, 1801, aged 79. He is 
spoken of in the monthly meeting memorial as " an indul- 
gent and prudent master." He was a philanthropist as well. 
He emancipated eighty slaves. In a memorial to the Gov- 
ernor and Council of Virginia he says that he " did, about 
the year 1777, place divers of his Negroes on lands of his 
own, at a small distance from his habitation, and for their 
encouragement to industry, and to remove every induce- 
ment to theft and dishonesty, supported them for the term 
of one year, and allowed them the full benefit of their labor." 

He also united with other Friends in solicitincr the Lecfis- 



' In 1798 two persons were reported, in answer to the Yearly 
MeetiiiK queries, as still lidding slaves, " cue of which appears to 
be a peculiar case and the other under notice." 

* See Brock's Prefatory Note to the fourth charter of the Royal 
African Company of England, in Collections Va. Hist. Soc, VI., 16. 



Souther )i Quakers and Slaverij. 215 

lature in behalf of the slaves, and " through his patronage 
and interposition in their favor in courts of law," had the 
liberty of several hundred established/ 

He was also interested in establishing schools for the 
negroes. We have already referred to the effort to estab- 
lish a school in 1759 mentioned by him. He circulated, 
presumably about 1782, or earlier, " Proposals for Establish- 
ing a free school for the Instruction of the Children of Blacks 
and people of Color," in which it was " earnestly recom- 
mended to the humane and the benevolent of all denomina- 
tions, chearfully to contribute to an Institution calculated to 
promote the spiritual and temporal interest of that unfortu- 
nate part of our fellow creatures, in forming their minds in the 
principles of virtue and religion, and in common or useful 
literature; Writing, Cyphering and Mechanic arts, as the 
most likely means to render so numerous a people fit for 
freedom and to become useful citizens." He proposed to 
establish the school on a tract of his own land called 
" Gravely [or Gravelly] Hills," situated three miles from 
Four Mile Creek, Henrico County, and containing 350 
acres, the whole revenue from which was to go toward its 
support; or in the event that the school was located else- 
where, to give iioo to it. Ebenezer Maule, another Friend, 
subscribed £50. Mr. Brock says that he does not know 
the results of this proposition," but from the Tjiemorial on 
the life of Pleasants we learn that he appropriated the rent 
of 350 acres of land and iio per annum to be laid out in a 
free school for the negroes. We know also that a few years 
after his death there was a school at Gravelly Run under 
care of Friends. It is reasonable to conclude that the wishes 
of Robert Pleasants met with some degree of fulfillment 
within a few years after his death. 

In 1801 the Yearly Meeting decided to call them " black 
people " instead of negroes, and there is frequent mention 
of them in the records. In 1802 Friends discussed the ques- 

' M. M. Memorial. ' Colls., Va. Hist. Soc, VI., 18. 



216 Southern Qiial-ers and Slavery. 

tion of a petition against the internal slave trade. Two years 
later they said that from defects in the law free negroes were 
carried out of the State and sold, and in 1812 they com- 
plain of a new law which restrained emancipation. In 1813 
a case arose where some Indians had been made slaves; 
suits were brought in their behalf by Friends and were won. 
This was also done in various instances for negroes/ 

Money was subscribed by English Friends toward the 
education of negroes, and in 1832 an address to Congress 
was discussed. They made some elifort to create a healthy 
anti-slavery sentiment. About 1827 they reprinted the chap- 
ter in Raymond's Political Economy on Slavery. But they 
were not abolitionists. They believed an attempt by the 
General Government to interfere with slavery would cause 
excitement and alarm. The power over slavery, they said, 
ivas in the States. 

In 1836 the Yearly Meeting attributed excitement on the ^ 
question of slavery to abolition societies, and said that this 
had raised the people of the United States almost as one 
man against them and had " closed the door of usefulness " 
on behalf of the negro. Tliey bear witness that the desire 
to emancipate was becoming more general in Virginia. One 
of the last things done by the Virginia Yearly Meeting is to 
warn Friends against the extremes of the abolitionists (1838). 

Under the Virginia Half Yearly Meeting, the Meeting for 
Sufferings became a sort of executive committee whose 
chief duty was to look after the interest of the negroes, to 
see to it that they got their freedom when they had a right 
to it, to provide for removal of the freedmen to free States, 
and to ameliorate their condition under the criminal laws. 
Negroes must be freed by will in Virginia, and it might 
Happen that this was not known until the will was probated, 
and then only to a few besides the parties concerned, who 
sometimes agreed to ignore this part and divide the slaves 



' The law requiring negroes to leave the State within a year or be 
sold as slaves seems not to have been enforced until 1828 



\ 



\ 



Southern Quakers and Slavery. 217 

among themselves. Friends interested themselves in such 
cases, and as soon as it was brought before the courts the 
freedom of the negroes was at once ordered. This brought 
Friends into disrepute among their neighbors, and public 
opinion on this point forced the removal of some to the 
West. 

Slavery was not a subject which attracted much attention 
among Virginia Quakers, comparatively speaking, after the 
beginning of the nineteenth century. The Society had by 
that time succeeded in clearing its own skirts of the institu- 
tion. It never became a slaveholder as it did in North Caro- 
lina. It waged few battles with the Legislature in the shape 
of petitions, it did not appeal to the courts as often, nor to" 
the Federal Government, nor did it seek to forward the colo- 
nization of blacks. It was weaker, less virile, less aggres- 
sive, and less successful in the amount and character of 
work accomplished. 

The harsh law passed by the North Carolina Assembly 
in 1779 seems to have paralyzed the hands of Friends for 
the time. Little was done in the next few years, but the 
Society was organizing for better work. Its first objects 
were (i) to clear the Society of slavery, and (2) to secure the 
rights of those who had been manumitted. 

In 1780 Friends agreed not to hire negroes except such 
as were manumitted and were yet minors or the property 
of orphans in unity. In 1781 some slaves were still held 
in bondage " and their instruction in piety much neglected." 
The Yearly Meeting of 1781 provided for the disownment 
of those who persisted in holding slaves after being labored 
with. This was elaborated in 1782, when the Yearly Meet- 
ing gives it as their judgment that the monthly meetings 
shall continue to labor with such as hold slaves, in love and 
tenderness, " endeavoring to convince them of the iniquity 
thereof, but after such care has been fully extended and to 
no purpose then the monthly meeting shall apply to the 
committee appointed out of the quarterly meeting for that 
purpose which shall assist them in laboring with such; but 



y 



218 Soiiflicni (Judlrrs and l^lavcrif. 

if after all their endeavors prove fruitless and they still 
persist on to hold them in slavery the monthly meeting 
may with the consent of the said committee testify their dis- 
imion with them." These instructions were renewed by the 
Yearly Meeting in 1783, and the sixth query was altered so 
as to read: "Are Friends clear of importing, purchasing, 
disposing of, or holding mankind as slaves, and do they use 
those well, who are set free and are under their care, 
through non-age or otherwise endeavoring to encourage 
them in a virtuous life?" 

This recommendation had its effect. Friends visited their 
members to discuss the matter; a number were released, and 
the prospect was that others would soon be freed. The 
work of persuasion was to be continued. Cases also de- 
manded the attention of Friends where negroes, after being 
freed, had been taken to A^irginia and sold. On one occa- 
sion a committee was sent there to investigate. In 1786 the 
Yearly Meeting repeats the query of 1783. In 1787 com- 
mittees were appointed to " labor with such Friends as re- 
main in the practice of holding their fellow men in a state 
of slavery, endeavoring to convince them of the iniquity of 
such practice," and if they still refused they were to be dis- 
owned. 

From the time of the Revolution on, the burthen of the 
journal of every Friend who visited the South is always 
the same — slavery. Some of these travelers in North Caro- 
lina made use of novel means to serve the slave. Thus Hugh 
Judge, who visited North Carolina in 1784. writes about 
central North Carolina: " After meeting we went home with 
a woman Friend, whose husband was not a member, but 
very kind to Friends. We had some friendly conversation 
with him concerning his holding a black man in bondage 
and proposed to him to set him free, his wife being very 
willing: but he discovered an unwillingness to let him go 
free, and we labored with him till late l)od-time. When we 
parted I told him to think deejily of it till morning, when 
I e.xpected he would be willing to set him free. In the 



Southern Quakers and Slavcrif. 219 

morning, I desired Isaac Jacobs to write a manumission and 
soon after it was done, tlie man came in. After a pause, 
it was proposed that he should sign it, which he did, and 
had it witnessed by several Friends." ' 

In 1787 Warner Mifflin attended the committee of North 
Carolina Yearly Meeting in a visit to the North Carolina 
Assembly with a " well written petition " on the subject. 
They were unsuccessful, but continued their work. In 1788 
that body, reciting that the act of 1777 was "found by ex- 
perience not to answer the good purposes by said act in- 
tended," because the power to arrest manumitted slaves 
was limited to freeholders and was made optional with them, 
provided that any justice, on information from any freeman, 
should issue a search-warrant to the sheriff, whose duty it 
was to search for the slave, and if found he was to be cast 
into jail and proceeded with as before." 

In 1786 we find one of the North Carolina quarterly meet- 
ings sending a committee to the Assembly of Georgia with 
a petition " respecting some enlargements to the enslaved 
negroes." We do not know its fortune. It probably had 
no visible effect.' From this time on for the next few years 
various petitions were sent to the State Legislature, but they 
were without visible effect. They were induced to send an- 
other petition by reason of a new law passed in 1795, which 
had compelled all emancipated slaves to give bond of £200 
for their good behavior while they remained in the State. 
This was virtual expulsion, and was, no doubt, intended as 
such.^ On the subject of these laws Friends sent up a new 
petition to the Assembly in 1796. 

' Journal, 32-48. ' Iredell. 637. 

'The Georgia law of 1801 provided that slaves should be manu- 
mitted only by application to the Legislature for that purpose. 
There is no indication in Cobb's Digest (1851) of any earlier law on 
the subject. The Quaker petition to the North Carolina Assembly 
of 1787 says manumission was allowed in all the States except North 
Carolina and Georgia. Stephen Grellett says that when traveling 
in Georgia in 1825 he was told by the Bishop of the Methodists that 
they were considering the advisability of making a law requiring 
all of their members to free their slaves. 

••Martin's Revisal, 1804, II., 79. 



220 Xoutlicru Qti<ilri\s and Slavery. 

Joshua Evans, who was then engaged on his trip to the 
South, was in Raleigh at the time the petition was presented 
and assisted them. His account of the treatment he re- 
ceived is of interest and value. '* We attended the house 
of common council, and had a number of private confer- 
ences with members, who received us friendly, but seemed 
mostly opposed to the freedom of the black people. My 
great Master endued me with an innocent boldness, in which 
I could use much freedom of conversation with the lead- 
ing men. ... I was therefore the more free to make use 
of private opportunities with the members of the Legisla- 
ture and others; there being now here a large number of 
the first rank, called gentlemen, most of them being men 
in some office, civil or militar}\ These opportunities were 
generally to my satisfaction, and I thought the respect they 
showed me was marvelous. ... At the tavern where we 
put up, there were about fifty boarders, all men of note; and 
as they had private rooms, a number of them invited me,, 
if at any time I was weary of noise, and wished to be more 
retired, freely to come into their rooms and sit with them, 
and that they should be pleased if I w-ould do so. All 
this seemed to be favorable towards furnishing me with op- 
portunities, when my mind was so engaged, to touch on 
their cruel laws and the hardships to which the pdor blacks 
were subjected in that government. . . . My hints to them 
on the subject, were in a way of plain dealing, and so well 
received, that many of them kindly invited me to come and 
see them, if I should come near their dwellings. It was 
unexpected to my companion and myself, that when he 
came to settle for our tavern expenses whilst here, the man 
would take no pay for my board, he was so well pleased 
with the visit." ' 

The petition itself is as follows: 

" The remonstrance and petition of the people called Qua- 
kers from the Yearly Meeting held in Pasquotank County, 



^Journal, iu I-'riends' Misccllain/. X.. 144-14(5 



Southern Quakers and ISlaccry. 221 

" That your remonstrants feel their minds impressed with 
sorrow, that such injustice and cruelty should be perpe- 
trated under sanction of law, in any christian community, 
as have been exercised towards numbers of the African 
race of people in this state, who after they were emanci- 
pated from motives purely conscientious, have been taken 
up, without being chargeable with the commission of any 
offence, and sold into abject slavery, divers being thereby 
far separated from their nearest connections in life. We 
believe such proceedings to be contrary to the laws of na- 
ture ; and that it will surely incur the wrath of the Almighty, 
who is no respecter of persons, having ' made of one blood 
all nations of men,' and sent his son into the world that 
all might be saved ; for ' He tasted death for every man,' 
agreeable to the holy scriptures so that all people, whatever 
their complexions may be, are objects of his mercy. For 
a legislative body of inen, professing Christianity, to be so 
partial, as thus to refuse any particular people the enjoy- 
ment of their liberty, under the laws of the government 
wherein they live, even when the owners of such slaves are 
desirous, from religious motives, that they might enjoy their 
personal freedom, as the natural right of all mankind, is so 
incompatible with the nature of a free republican govern- 
ment, and repugnant to the spirit of the christian religion, 
that the present case, perhaps, all circumstances considered, 
hath never been paralleled in Christendom; yet we hope di- 
vine wisdom may enable this house to exercise the power 
vested in them, to the honor of the most High, and the wel- 
fare of the State, that piety and virtue may be promoted, 
and injustice with other vice and immorality suppressed. 
Therefore we earnestly entreat and request that you may 
please to give your attention to this important and interest- 
ing subject, and pass an act whereby the free citizens of 
this state, who are conscientiously scrupulous of holding 
slaves, may legally emancipate them, and the persons so 
liberated be under protection of law; such a reasonable re- 
quest we hope will not now be rejected, as we have no mo- 



-22 SotttJiirii (JiKih rs and Slarcri/. 

live herein but a sincere desire that mercy, justice and equity 
may be put in practice, and are respectfully your friends." ' 
The petition of the Quakers was rejected and a new law 
passed (November, 1796), seemingly in defiance. The As- 
sembly, " to amend, strengthen and confirm " the acts against 
emancipation, re-enacted " that no slave shall be set free in 
any case, or under any pretence whatsoever, except for meri- 
torious services, to be adjudged of and allowed by the county 
court and license first had and obtained therefor." ' Further, 
the Quakers in eastern North Carolina found themselves 
presented by the grand jury in Edenton "as the authors of 
the common mischief in this quarter," for great peril and 
danger was caused by their proceedings, the idea of emanci- 
pation was openly held out to the slaves, their minds were 
corrupted and alienated from service. " runaways are pro- 
tected, harboured and encouraged by them. Arsons are 
committed without probability of discovery." 

'The following is a copy of an emancipation paper "such as 

Friends used to give their slaves when they set them free, according 
to the discipline of the Society, and the dictates of the witness of 
\ truth in their own breasts" : 

\ " I Joseph Jordan of Northamton county in North Carolina from 

mature deliberate consideration and the convictions of my own 
mind being fully persuaded that freedom is the natural right of all 
mankind, and that no law moral nor divine has given me a just 
right to or proper [ty] in the j)ersons of any of my fellow creatures, 
and being desirous to fulfill the injunction of our Lord and Saviour 
Jesus Christ, by doing to others as I would be done by, do there- 
fore declare, that having under my care a number of negroes 
named and aged as followers [the names and ages are here inserted] 
I do for myself my heirs Executors and administrators, hereby 
release unto so many of them as are come of age, men twenty one, 
and women eighteen, all my right interest and claim or pretensions 
of claim whatsoever, as to their persons or any estate they may 
hereafter acciuire, and those now under age to partake of the same 
liberty and estate as thej' come to the ages as above written %vithout 
any interruption from me or anv person claiming for, by. from or 
under me. In witness whereof I have hereunto set my hand and 
seal this tenth day of the eighth month in the year of our Lord one 
thousand seven hundred and eighty four. ^^— ^ 

"Joseph Jordan Seal." 
'■ Sealed and delivered in the presence of v.-.—' 

Samuel Parker & Aaron Lancaster.'' 

•Martin's 7?eyi.saZ, IL, 88. 



Southern Quakers and Slavery. 223 

It was in answer to these charges and to the enactment 
of 1796 that the Quakers addressed a petition to the As- 
sembly of 1797 which towers in the plain and simple gran- 
deur of its appeal to that body, not directly for the slave, 
but for the rights of freemen which had been denied to 
themselves: "But after some of the xA.frican race of people, 
were, from laudible motives liberated, they have (in conse- 
quence of several laws of this state), been since reduced to 
abject slavery: Now, that such laws, so opposite to the 
spirit of liberty, should exist, and be rigorously executed in 
this particular state, when no such are adopted in any of 
her sister states, we desire may claim your serious consider- 
ation. 

"Therefore w^e earnestly request, that you may please to 
give your attention to this important subject, and grant 
an act whereby the free citizens of this state, who are con- 
scientiously scrupulous of keeping mankind in slavery, may 
emancipate them, and the persons so liberated be under the 
protection of the law: it is not to enjoin a general emanci- 
pation, or to compel any to liberate their slaves, that we 
have solicited you, but only that Uberty of conscience in 
that respect, may be tolerated; which we conceive to be 
reasonable, and are not apprehensive that such an equita- 
ble step will be injurious, or against the interests of the 
state." 

Little seems to have been done for the next few years, ^ 
and the committee that waited on the Legislature in 181 5 
found it " in an unfavorable disposition towards our So- 
ciety and pointedly opposed to any law or measure being 

'It is curious to note that just at this time, when they were 
making such eloquent appeals for the right of liberating slaves, a 
colored man appealed for admission into the Society. The Yearly 
Meeting recommended that the quarterly meeting " attend to the 
discipline in that respect without distinction of color," and it 
seems that he got in, but after several years of waiting. Thomas 
Shillitoe says negroes were members of Newbegun Creek meeting 
in 1829. After the Civil War there were a number of applications 
for membership from colored men, but they seem to have been 
rejected because of an insufficient knowledge of Friends' prin- 
ciples. 



/ 



224 SoutJifni Quakers and Slavery. 

taken on behalf of the black people." This was no doubt 
due to the position of the Friends in the matter of bearing 
arms in the war of 1812. 

The laws against emancipation were as rigid as ever. In 
l- 1 801 the Assembly had further required all masters liberat- 
ing their slaves to enter into bond that the slaves so liber- 
ated should not become a charge to the parish.' The act 
of 1818 changed the law so far as to invest the superior 
court instead of the county court of pleas and quarter ses- 
sions W'ith the power of emancipation.' It was not till 1830 
that a general emancipation law was passed. Under this 
law, persons desiring to free slaves were required to file a 
petition in the superior court stating the name, sex and age 
of each, and praying permission to emancipate the same. He 
was to show that he had given public notice of his intention to 
file such a petition at least six weeks before its hearing. He 
was also to enter into bond of $1,000 for each slave that they 
would demean themselves correctly while within the State, 
and that they would leave it within ninety days. Slaves 
could be freed by will, ])rovided the executor went through 
the same formula. Slaves might also be freed for meritorious 
service. Such frcedmen w-ere not required to leave the 
State.' This remained the law of emancipation vmtil the 
War.' 

The rigidity of North Carolina law caused North Carolina 
Quakerism to take a form which it assumed nowhere else. 
The institution itself became a slaveholder. This movement 
began in 1808. The Yearly ^Meeting of that year appointed 
y a committee of seven to have under care all suffering cases 
of people of color. This connnittee seems to have evolved 
a system under which certain parties were authorized to act 
as agents and to receive assignments of slaves from mas- 



' Martin's Revisal, II., 179. 
Potter and Yancey's Revival, IT., 144C. 



^LawHof Nuith Carolina. KSLid, ch. 9, pp. 12-14. 
■•See Revised Statutes, 1837, I., 585-587; Revised Code, 1855, 573- 
575. 



Southern Quakers and Slaveri/. 225 

ters who wished to be rid of them. This custom lasted 
until the Civil War, Its object was to give virtual freedom 
to the blacks when actual freedom was not recognized by 
the State; to ameliorate their condition, and to transport 
them to the free States. The agents or trustees thus ap- 
pointed had full power over the negroes thus placed under 
them, to hire them out, receive their wages, etc.; they might 
" act discretionary with particular characters, and if they or 
any of them will not comply with the directions of the 
agents, after the necessar}^ care has been taken, they may 
give them up to a course of law," or " they may be sub- 
jected by the most moderate means that will effectually re- 
duce the object to industry for the benefit of himseff or her- 
self." 

This step was not taken, however, until consultation had 
been had with some of the best legal talent in the State. 
Under date of December 3, 1809, Judge Gaston says: "By 
the act of 1796, Chapter 11,^ it is made lawful for any re- 
ligious society or congregation in the state to elect any 
number of their body, as trustees which trustees and their 
successors in ofifice shall have full power to purchase and 
hold in trust for their society or congregation any real estate, 
and to receive any donations of whatever kind, for the use 
and benefit of such society or congregation; to this power 
of making purchase and receiving donations there is but 
one limitation, which is, that under this act, no single con- 
gregation or society shall hold more lands than shall amount 
in quantity to 2,000 acres and in value to £200 per year. It 
necessarily follows that donations of personal property, such 
as money, slaves &c. may be receiv'd to any amount, — 
such donations cannot be set aside by any persons claim- 
ing under the donors, nor can they be impaired by any one ; 

' This act, entitled " An act to secure property to religious socie- 
ties or congregations of every denomination," was passed because 
'■■ several donations have been given by divers persons for the use 
of promoting sundry religious societies and congregations in this 
state, and no person being legally authorized to receive and appro- 
priate the same agreeable to the intention of the donor." 



226 Southern (Juakcrs and Slavery. 

unless by the creditors of the persons who have made such 
gifts fraudulently to defeat the recovery of just debts, or 
by those who can show a superior and paramount title to 
the property given, nor are they liable for the debts of the 
individual trustees to whom the conveyance is made, — for 
the act especially provides that conveyances and donations 
in the manner above mentioned shall be valid in law to 
convey to the society or congregation the absolute estate 
of the property comprehended in the instrument of con- 
veyance or gift. And if the absolute estate therein be vested 
in the society, of course there is none in the trustees through 
whose medium the transfer is efifected or at most a legal and 
not a beneficial interest." 

The Society also took the precaution to secure from Judge 
Gaston a draft of the proper form for such gifts. This was 
not different from the fomi used in making bequests to 
other religious societies. The character and extent of the 
responsibility of the master for the acts of the slave was 
also closely examined. 

The system did not at first meet with much favor, and 
the Yearly fleeting was anxious to know the general mind 
on the subject. As a result we find the following action by 
the Yearly Meeting of 1809: "And it is further the result 
of the committee that as the agents appointed last yearly 
meeting have had assignments executed to them to a con- 
siderable amount in number of people of color, they are 
directed to place minors and others of them in stations suit- 
ing their condition so as there may be a probability of their 
being instructed in virtue morality and useful employment 
in life, and if opportunity offers for their freedom that they 
use exertions for their emancipation, and the authority of 
agents appointed last Yearly Meeting for the different quar- 
ters shall in future cases cease till next Yearly Meeting, and 
it is recommended down to the quarters to send up the 
general mind how to act in future in the aforesaid cases." 

Cane Creek Monthly Meeting, taking this matter into con- 
sideration, in accord with the direction of the last quarterly 



Southern Quakers and Slavery. 227 

meeting, recorded under date of April 7, 1810: " It is agreed 
that the authority of the agents appointed by the Yearly 
Meeting be suspended or entirely cease, and that no more 
people of color be received in that way by the Yearly Meet- 
ing." 

But it is evident that this proposed suspension of the 
authority of the agents was not the general mind, or at 
any rate remained so only a short time. On the other 
hand, the Society went vigorously to work to carry out the 
idea; for we find in 1814 that more than three hundred and 
fifty negroes had already been transferred to the agents. In 
1822, John Kennedy assigns thirty-six negroes to the com- 
mittee; Joseph Borden assigns eighteen; and the heirs of 
Thcmas Outlaw, fifty-nine. There were then four hundred 
and fifty in their hands.^ Their gifts came from all parts of 
the Yearly Meeting, and persons other than Quakers began 
to make them assignments, for the Yearly Meeting of 1822 
found it necessary to forbid the agents to receive negroes 
from any except members of Society. 

The central aim of this movement Avas to send the negroes 
thus put into the hands of Friends to free governments. 
As early as 1814 forty had been sent to Pennsylvania, but 
it was not deemed permissible for Friends to purchase slaves 
with the view of sending them to free governments when it 
was judged their masters had received a reasonable remu- 
neration. 

In 1822 a committee was appointed to examine the laws 
of some of the free States " respecting the admission of 

' We have one instance as early as 1799, when Thomas Wads- 
worth, of Charleston, S. C, liberated his slaves, gave them fifty- 
acres of laud each, and put them under the care of Bush River 
Meeting. By the South Carolina law of 1723 the manumitted slave 
had to leave the province in twelve months or lose his freedom. 
In 1735 the time was reduced to six months, unless the manumission 
was approved by the Legislature. The law of 1800 required proof 
of the good character of the slaves to be liberated and their ability 
to earn their living, and that the deed of gift be registered. In 1805 
Catherine White gave her negroes to Rich Square Monthly Meeting. 



228 Southern Quakers and Slavery. 

people of color therein and if thought necessary to consult 
the Legislature of such state, the situation of which appears 
most favorable . . . and that Friends endeavor to remove them 
as fast as practicable." The next year the committee re- 
ported tliat there was nothing " in the laws of Ohio, Indiana 
and Illinois to prevent the introduction the people of color 
into those States." The agents were thereupon instructed 
to remove them " as fast as they are willing to go," and 
$200 was appropriated for the work that year. 

Friends were divided as to the most desirable place for 
their wards. Some favored Ohio and Indiana, some Phila- 
delphia, and others Hayti or Liberia; but the distance of 
Liberia and the scarcity and uncertainty of the news made 
the negroes uneasy and many refused to go there. These 
objections were also true to a less extent of Hayti. 

There were five hundred negroes under care in 1824, and 
seven hundred and twenty-seven had been received in all. 
In 1826 some six hundred were under care; of these, three 
hundred and sixteen were willing to go to Liberia; one 
hundred and one to the West; fifteen to Philadelphia; ninety- 
nine wished to stay at home, and seventy-eight were in- 
volved in lawsuits. A summary report in 1830 says that 
six hundred and fifty-two had gone to free governments at 
an expense of $12,769.51, and four hundred and two were 
then under care. There were three hundred under care 
in the Eastern Quarter in 1834, and in that year one hun- 
dred and thirty-three were sent to Indiana. Two years be- 
fore Friends had paid a wagoner $300 to take a load- of 
negroes from Core Sound, X. C, to Indiana. 

From about 1835 slaver}' becomes less important; it was 
turned over to the care of the Meeting for Sufferings. The 
" African fund " was $3,375.05 in 1837. It was replenished 
from time to time and was used to assist negroes to free 
governments. In 1856 it was but $353.12. Eighteen ne- 
groes were still under care of the Society in 1856. It is 
probable that North Carolina Yearly Meeting continued 



ISoutheni Quakers and t<lavery. 229 

to hold negroes in its corporate capacity until the Emanci- 
pation Proclamation. 

Friends were also instrumental in securing the liberty of 
such slaves as were entitled to it by the will of their mas- 
ters, and brought suit from time to time for this purpose. 
A suit of this kind was tried in Carteret County as late as 
1854. They sometimes paid the charges against such ne- 
groes and thus set them free. They were also accustomed 
to purchase such slaves as their masters were willing to 
part with at a low price, take them to free governments and 
accept their notes in discharge of the obligation. They 
urged the free women to go West and leave their slave hus- 
bands, using, no doubt, the arguments that were used when 
husband and wife were separated by the slave-trader. 

But Friends showed occasionally a selfish desire to be 
rid of slaves without any corresponding care as to what 
should be done with them when they were free. Thus 
Joseph Hoag, a Vermont Friend, who visited the South in 
1 81 2, says that many Quakers who had removed from eas- 
tern North Carolina to the West had freed their slaves and 
then left them unprovided for, thus making them a burden 
to those who remained. In 1825 the number thus left ne- 
glected was put at ninety-five. Hoag says also that when 
a Quaker married outside of Society and took slaves as 
his wife's dower he became the worst of all classes to deal 
with.' 

Friends also sought to assist the negro through the Am- 
erican Colonization Society. During the years 1825 to 
1 83 1 North Carolina Yearly Meeting was particularly in- 
terested in the work of this Society. Although some mem- 
bers, like Levi Coffin," looked on it as little more than an 
adjunct of the slave power, the Society of Friends worked 
in harmony with it. The exchange of letters between the 

tvvo was frequent and of the most friendly character.* 
« 

''^ Journal, 177, 180. ^Reminiscences, 75, 76. 

^ Jeremiah Hubbard and Allen Hill were delegates from Friends 
in North Carolina to its annual session in Washington in 1832. 



230 tioutlwrn i^nakcn; and ISlaccrij. 

Friends acted as a sort of collecting agency for the Coloni- 
zation Societ}- and contributed more than $2,000 to its 
funds. This money was collected from the meetings and 
individuals to the northward, and a considerable part came 
from England. In 1826 nearly $5,000 was given to North 
Carolina Yearly ]\Ieeting with wdiich to send negroes out 
of the State. Acting under the advice of the Colonization 
Society and of Benjamin Lundy, a vessel was fitted out and 
sailed from Beaufort, N. C, for Hayti. She carried one 
hundred and nineteen emigrants. John Fellsee and Phineas 
Xixon were appointed to go with them. They report that 
of the one hundred and nineteen persons, fifty-four w-ere sent 
by the agents of the Yearly ]\Ieeting, fifty-five were sent by 
members of Society, eight were free persons intermarried 
with slaves, and two were the slaves of persons not in So- 
ciet}^ and were sent by them. They landed at Aux Cayes, 
were received with cheerfulness, and provided wnith four 
months' provisions out of the government stores. " There 
were a number of applications made to them and us for 
them to live with the different applicants, but they were 
generally desirous of living as near together as they con- 
veniently could; and they mostly went on the farms of a 
few of the principle \sic] men of the place. It is customary 
among the landholders of the Island to have their farms 
cultivated by tenants, who are allowed a small provision 
ground, to raise fruits, vegetables, &c. for the support of 
their families and to have one half of the salable produce 
of the farm they cultivate besides; and these conditions 
were granted to the emigrants, altho they were unacquainted 
with the systems of cropping there." The bad character de- 
veloped by earlief American emigrants to Hayti had com- 
pelled the Haytians to require new immigrants to establish 
a good character before they were allowed to hold land in 
fee simple. This these immigrants were disposed to under- 
take to do, and the committee suggested that the Yearly 
Meeting petition the President of Hayti in their behalf for 
a grant of land. Good news was received the next year. 



Southern Quakers and Slavery. 231 

President Boyer was so well pleased that he wanted twenty 
more negroes with their families to work on his sugar plan- 
tations, and was willing to advance money for their expenses. 
Another planter was ready to employ from one hundred to 
six hundred on the same terms. 

In 1826 a ship with some fifty emigrants from eastern 
North Carolina sailed for Africa; the brig Doris sailed with 
sixty-seven on board in 1827. 
X There was some effort to educate the negroes who came 
under Friends' care. In 1816 Friends opened a school for 
two days in the week to last three months, and report two 
years later "that some of them can spell and some few 
read." It was agreed that their education was to be ex- 
tended until the males could " read, write and cypher as 
far as the rule of three, and those of the females to read 
and write." Levi Coffin tells how he and his cousin Vestal 
Coffin undertook in the summer of 1821 to organize a 
Sunday school for the blacks at New Garden. Some mas- 
ters were induced to allow their slaves to attend, and these 
were learning to spell in words of two or three letters, when 
other masters became alarmed, for it made their own slaves 
discontented and uneasy; they threatened the terrors of the 
law; the slaves were kept at home and the school was 
closed.' 

These threats were perhaps intended for effect and noth- 
ing more, for it does not seem that there were at that time 
any specific laws in North Carolina forbidding education 
to the slave, but later, during the period 1830-35, the Legis- 
lature and the Constitutional Convention of 1835, moving in 
harmony with the strong reaction against the slave which 
had already set in, the momentum of which reaction was 
sharply accelerated by the horrors of the Nat Turner insur- 
rection in August, 1 83 1, put an end to this phase of activity 
by disfranchising the free negro and forbidding him to teach 
or to preach; it disarmed both slave and free negroes, and 

^Reminiscences, 69-71. 



2.'^2 SoiitJicrn Qualrrs and S^Iarerj/. 

forbade slaves to be taught, figures excepted, under a pen- 
alty varying from $ioo to $200 if a white person was the 
teacher, with twenty to thirty-nine lashes for a free negro, 
and thirty-nine lashes for a slave teacher. Friends pre- 
sented a memorial against this law, but it was without ef- 
fect/ 

North Carolina Friends petitioned Congress in behalf of 
the negroes as early as 181 6, but their efforts, vicAved in 
their larger aspect, met with small success. The reason 
seems to have been first of all in the negroes themselves. 
They did not appreciate these efforts. Some who had been 
set free were involved in lawsuits to reduce them to slavery 
again; some had intermarried w^ith slaves not in Society; 
some had married free blacks; some were unwilling to leave, 
and while others would agree to remove, " little confidence 
is put in ^vhat they agree to." ^ But the worst is not yet. 
The States of Illinois and Indiana, alarmed at the numbers 
of blacks that were threatening to pour in on them by rea- 
son of the North Carolina Quakers, hastened to pass acts, 
Illinois in 1831, and Indiana a little later, forbidding mas- 
ters to carry negroes there for the purpose of giving them 
freedom, and also forbidding negroes already free to mi- 
grate thither.^ We know, moreover, that Western Friends 
were not free from blame in this matter. There is among 
the records of Friends at New Garden a summary of a let- 
ter from Samuel Charles to Jeremiah Hubbard and Henry 
Ballinger, under date of loth of 5th month, 1826, " pur- 
porting that the prejudice against a coloured population, was 
as great in Indiana, as in North Carolina, and that there 

^ Laws of North Carolina. 1830-31, chapt. 6. For an account of 
the struggle over the disfranchisement of the free negro by tlie 
Constitutional Convention of 1835, see my paper in the Political 
Science Qiiarterli/ for Dec, 1894, on Tlie Histonj of Negro Suffrage 
in the South. 

' TJie last statement was omitted from the Narrative of their 
work printed in 1848, p. 35. 

Tiiese acts were incorporated into the Illinois Constitution of 
1848 and tiie Indiana Constitution of 1851. The free negroes in 
Indiana in 1850 were 11.202 ; in Illinois, 5.436 ; in Virginia. 54,383 ; 
in North Carolina, 27,463. 



I 



Southern Quakers and Slavery. 233 

was as much of it in the minds of members of our Society 
there as in other people, that they say as others do that 
they ought to be free, but they do not want them there, and 
he says notwithstanding, that is called a free state, a free 
black person is not allowed as much priveledge there by law, 
as in North Carolina." When a company reached there 
about 1837 they found they could not stay; they turned to 
Pennsylvania, but they were not allowed to remain there 
either, and it was not until they reached Africa that they 
found a resting place. 

In 1832 .Friends report little or no opening for negroes 
in the North. This feeling of hostility to the unfortunate 
blacks is well illustrated by the following letter from Ed- 
ward Bettle, of Philadelphia, to Nathan Mendenhall, of 
North Carolina, under date of May 21, 1832: "Thy favour 
of the 15th, just came to hand this morning and in the 
absense of father from the city, I opened it, and am con- 
municating the contents relative to the black people, to 
some of the Friends who are mentioned in thy letter — they 
all united in the earnest desire that no more of the blacks 
may at present be sent to these parts, as the effect of such 
a measure would probably be desastrous to the peace and 
comfort of the whole coloured population of Pennsylvania. 
A law was before our Legislature at its last session, 
which the friends of the negroes had great difficulty in pos- 
poning, making similar provisions to the law of Indiana, 
to which thou has refered, and containing the further most 
obnoxious provision that all free people of colour now resi- 
dent in Pennsylvania should be obliged to carry passes in 
traveling from one county of the state to another, and that 
should give security against becoming chargeable to the 
public, whenever they might change their residence from 
one part of the state to another. This act was brought be- 
fore our Legislature in consequence of the arrival at Chester 
I believe of some fugetives from Southamton, Virginia af- 
ter massacre there — the public mind here is more roused 
even among respectable persons against these poor people, 



234 Soanicni Quakers and Slavery. 

than it has been for several years, and on the 27th, of this 
month, an adjourned session of tlie Legislature will take 
place; when the bill I have just alluded to is again to be 
taken up and I have no doubt if your blacks arrive here 
(as they will if now shiped) while the subject is under dis- 
cussion that very circumstance will be the means of causing 
the passage of a bill which will bring the utmost trouble 
upon the coloured population in our state and at the same 
time prevent any such persons from other states ever emi- 
grating to Pennsylvania. 

" This same law is also ver\- severe in its provisions against 
fugetive slaves, repealing some very good acts passed a few 
years ago upon that subject, and thus leaving the kidnap- 
pers, fair scope for their nefarious labours. Under all these 
circumstances, we do sincerely hope you may not have 
shiped the blacks when this reaches you. An expedition 
is to sail to Liberia from Norfolk in a short time as I am 
informed, perhaps you might get your company into that 
ship. Ver>' respectfully thy friend 

Edw.vrd Bettle." 

The cause of the slave also received some assistance 
during a part of this period, particularly between 1816 and 
1835, ffom a number of manumission societies in central 
North Carolina. These societies were most numerous and 
aggressive in Guilford County. Quakers did not claim con- 
trol over these organizations, nor were they conducted as 
Quaker bodies, but Quaker influence was paramount in 
their development and growth, and any study of Quakerism 
in North Carolina which does not deal with them in detail 
would be defective. 

The minutes of the central, or general, society have re- 
cently come to light. They begin with July, 1816, which 
seems to have been the date of the tirst general mee'ting. 
Branches were already existing, for four branches, Centre, 
Caraway. Deep River, and New Garden, all in or near Guil- 



Southern Quakers and Slavery. 235 

ford County, were represented at this meeting. Moses 
Swaim, who afterwards pubHshed a remarkably strong paper 
on the subject of aboHtion, was made president. One hun- 
dred and forty-seven members were reported. Most of them 
have Quaker names, but the records show few traces of 
Quaker phrases and methods of procedure. There was a 
president, secretary, and treasurer, and they performed the 
regular duties of their respective offices. Membership was 
limited to " free white males." The constitution, as origin- 
ally proposed, contained a provision that any member who 
should vote for a member of the Legislature not in favor 
of emancipation should be impeached, but this provision 
was stricken out. Committees were appointed to corre- 
spond with the Manumission Society of Tennessee. The 
latter had been organized about this time; was, doubtless, 
also largely under the influence of Friends, and two dele- 
gates from Tennessee were present at one of the meetings. 
The society agreed also to address the Baptists, Methodists, 
Presbyterians and Moravians in the section. The meetings 
were to be held in the meeting-houses at Centre and Deep 
River alternately, in April and October. 

The branch meetings from which this central organization 
had sprung were, beyond doubt, the work of Charles Os- 
born (i 775-1850), one of the greatest of the anti-slavery 
agitators. Osborn was born in North Carolina, August 21, 
1775. He removed at nineteen with his parents to Tennes- 
see. He began to preach about 1806, and visited most 
meetings in the South during the next few years. He was 
the first man in America to proclaim the doctrine of im- 
mediate and unconditional emancipation. In December, 
1814, he was engaged in the organization of the Tennessee 
Manumission Society,' with which the North Carolina so- 

'In 1797 a powerful appeal for the abolition of slavery was pub- 
lished as a communication in the Knoxville Gazette. It called a 
meeting at a town in Washington County in March, 1797. to form a 
Manumission Society. The communication bears evidence of having 
been written by a Quaker. (Humes, Loyal Moiintaineers of Ten- 
nessee, p. 32.) On January 5, 1824, Mr. Blair, of Tennessee, pre- 



231) SoutJwrn Qimh'rK uiid Sluieri/. 

ciety kept up a close correspondence. The years 1814 and 
1 81 5 were spent largely in this work. We learn from his 
journal that he organized such societies in Guilford County, 
N. C, in 1816 (pp. 137-147). In that year he removed to 
Mount Pleasant, O., and in August, 181 7, published the 
first number of T/w PJiilautJiropist. This was the first 
journal in America to advocate unconditional emancipa- 
tion.' He abstained from the use of all slave-grown pro- 
duce, and in 1842-43 joined anti-slavery Friends in Indiana. 
His work in North Carolina seems to have been to plant 
the seeds of emancipation societies among the Quakers and 
others, and these at once developed the greater strength 
that comes with union. 

There w^as soon division, however, within the Manumis- 
sion Society. One part favored the American Colonization 
Society and decided to open communication with it. They 
even went further and decided in 1817 to change the name 
of their societ}^ to " IManumission and Colonization So- 
ciet>'." Levi Coffin gives an interesting account of this 
fight in his Reminiscences (pp. 75-76): "The last convention 
that I attended was held at General [Alexander] Gray's in 
Randolph County. He was a wealthy man and owned a 

sented a memorial to the House of Representatives from the ninth 
convention of the Manumission Society of Tennessee, praying Con- 
gress to adopt measures for the prevention of slavery in future in 
any State where it was not then allowed by law and for its pro- 
scription in States yet to be formed and admitted to the Union. 

' It was not until after the present volume was ready for the press 
that I had the opportunity to see George W. Julian's paper on The 
rank of Charles Osborn as an anti-slavery pioneer (Indianapolis, 
1891). I am gratified to know that I have arrived by an independ- 
ent examination of the records at the same conclusion as Mr. 
Julian. Hesays (p. 4): " Our accepted histories and manuals agree 
in according to William Lloyd Garrison the honor of first proclaim- 
ing, on this side of the Atlantic, the doctrine of 'immediate and 
unconditional emancipation.' They also agree in awarding to 
Benjamin Lundy the credit of i)ublishing the lirst anti-slavery 
newspaper of this century, and of being the pioneer abolitionist of 
the United States. These statements are now received without 
question, and supported by Johnson's ' Life of Garrison.' Greeley's 
' History of the American Conflict,' Wilson's * Rise and Fall of the 
Slave Power,' Von Hoist's 'Constitutional and Political History of 



Southern Quakers and Slavery. 237 

number of slaves, but was interested in our movement. The 
meeting was held in his large new barn, which was covered 
but not weather-boarded, and which afforded ample room 
for the assembly. Quite a number of slave holders were 
present who favored gradual manumission and colonization. 
They argued that if the slaves were manumitted, they must 
be sent to Africa; it would not do for them to remain in 
this country; they must return to Africa, and this must be 
made a condition of their liberty. A motion was made to 
amend our constitution, so that the name of our organiza- 
tion would be ' Manumission and Colonization Society.' 
This produced a sharp debate. Many of us were opposed 
to making colonization a condition of freedom, believing 
it to be an odious plan of expatriation concocted by slave 
holders, to open a drain by which they might get rid of 
free negroes, and thus remain in more secure possession of 
their slave property. They considered free negroes a dan- 
gerous element among slaves. We had no objection to 
free negroes going to Africa of their own will, but to com- 
pel them to go as a condition of freedom was a movement 
to which we were conscientiously opposed and against which 
we strongly contended. When the vote was taken, the 

the United States,' and various other authorities. It is the chief 
purpose of this paper to controvert these alleged facts, and to show 
that Charles Osborn, an eminent minister in the Society of Friends, 
proclaimed the doctrine of immediate and unconditional emancipa- 
tion when William Lloyd Garrison was only nine years old, and 
nearly nine years before that doctrine was announced by Elizabeth 
Heyrick in England ; and that Mr. Osborn also edited and published 
one of the first anti-slavery newspapers in the United States, and 
thus entitled to take rank as the real pioneer of American abolition. " 
He substantiates the first claim on the evidence : 1. of Rachel 
Swain, sister-in-law of Osborn, who was present when he organ- 
ized the Tennessee Manumission Society in December, 1814, and 
who says that its object was immediate and unconditional emanci- 
pation : 3. by Rev. John Rankin, a native and resident of Tennessee 
up to 1817, who bears testimony to the same thing ; 3. by the testi- 
mony in the Reminiscences of Levi Coffin, the president of the 
Underground Railroad and himself a native of Carolina ; 4. by the 
document published in 1843 and reviewing certain proceedings of 
Indiana Yearly Meeting in dealing with Mr. Osborn ; 5. by the 
memorial of Osborn adopted by the Society of Anti-Slavery Friends 



23S i<outlu rii (Junkers <uid Shiveri/. 

motion was carried l)y a small majority. We felt that the 
slave power had got the ascendancy in our Society, and 
that we could no longer work in it. The convention broke 
up in confusion and our New Garden branch withdrew to 
itself, no longer cooperating with the others. Our little 
anti-slavery band, composed mostly of Friends, continued 
to meet at Xew Garden until the majority of the members 
emigrated to the west, preferring to live in a free state." 

But notwithstanding these troubles and withdrawals, the 
society went on with its work; in i8i8 it undertook to en- 
force the laws against kidnapping, and discussed sending a 
delegation to the American Convention for the Abolition 
of Slavery, but this was indefinitely postponed, and a motion 
to petition the Legislature in behalf of the free blacks was 
also lost. In April, 1819. sixty-five members were reported 
from the Centre branch; Deep River had forty-eight; New 
Garden, sixty; Caraway, forty-two; Reedy Fork, thirty-one; 
Springfield, thirty-five; total, two hundred and eighty-one. 
From 1819 to 1825 there were frequent meetings, but little 
was done; the society spent much of its time in discussing 
what its name and constitution should be; it dallfed much 

with the American Colonization Society, and once contri- 
• 

of which he was a member ; 6. by his opposition to the incorpora- 
tion of the colonization idea into the Tennessee Manumission So- 
ciety : 7. by his opposition to colonization in general. 

08l)orn issued the prospectus of his Philanthrojnst from Mount 
Pleasant, O., in 1816. The first number appeared August 29, 1817. 
Its publication was continued until the eighth of October, 1818. 
" The tone of the i)aper was earnestly moral and religious. He de- 
voted its columns considerably to the interests of temperance and 
peace, but the burden and travail of his heart was slavery. I speak 
by authority, having the bound volumes of the paper before me. 
It was just such a paper as Elijah P. Lovejoy was murdered for 
publishing in Illinois twenty years later. Benjamin Lundy, then 
residing at St. Clairsville. was one of its agents, as the paper shows. 
The subject of slavery is discussed from eighty to ninety timeB, 
making an average of nearly twice in each number." The paper 
was sold to Elislia Bates (doubtless the same man who had been 
prominent among Friends in Virginia and had recently migrated 
to tlie West), but as Lundj' did not like the anti-slavery character 
which the pai)er now assumed, lie began the i)ublication at Mount 
Pleasant, in January, 1H21 , of the deiiiiis of Un iversal Emancipation. 
He soon removed this paper to Tennessee, as we shall see. 



Southern Quakers and Slaver i/. 239 

buted $20 to its funds; committees were appointed to do 
various things that were not done, and were continued to 
do the same thing the next year. Some interest in the edu- 
cation of the negro was also manifested; the funds were 
reported to be $47.07!, this was to be increased and the 
proceeds were to be devoted to his education, but two years 
later it had been increased by only $2.62. 

The society received a new impulse from the anti-slavery 
agitation of Benjamin Lundy, who removed from Ohio to 
Tennessee in 1821 and published there for three years T/ie 
Genius of Universal Einancipatio7i} He delivered his first 
public address against slavery at Deep Creek, North Caro- 
lina, in 1824; held some fifteen or twenty anti-slavery meet- 
ings and organized twelve or fourteen abolition societies. 
He removed his paper to Baltimore, and for six months 
William Swain, of North Carolina, was his assistant." 

In April, 1824, the president of the society reviews the 
progress of the doctrine of abolition; notes the recent or- 
ganization of an abolition society in Virginia; and says 
there were twenty branches to the one in Tennessee with 
some seven hundred members. Subscriptions to Lundy's 
paper were encouraged, new branches were reported, and 
good Quaker names, like Mendenhall, Coffin, Hubbard, 
Gardner, Nixon, Stocker, Wilson, White, Hiatt, Stanley and 

'Lundy (1789-1839) was also a Quaker and was born in New 
Jersey. He removed to Wheeling, Va., at 19 years of age, and, as 
we have seen, contributed on slavery to Osborn's paper. The Philan- 
thropist. We have seen also how his paper. The Genivs, grew out 
of Osborn's sale of the earlier journal. The Life of William Lloyd 
Garrison, by his children (I., p. 88), says that Elihu Embree, also a 
Friend, had begun a small octavo monthly newspaper, called The 
Emancipator, at Jonesborough, Tenn., in 1820, but Embree soon 
died, and early in 1822 The Genius was removed, at the earnest 
solicitations of Embree 's friends, to Greenville, Tenn., and printed 
on the press of the late Emancipator. Humes (p. 33) gives a version 
somewhat different from the above. He says that in March. 1819, 
the Manumission Intelligencer, weekly, was issued at Jonesboro. 
Its publication gave place the next year to The Emancipator, 
monthly, by Elijah Embree, one of two Quaker brothers from 
Philadelphia, who manufactured iron near Elizabethton. 

"^ Life, Travels, and Opinions, 22-23. 



240 Southern Quakers and Slavery. 

Piggott, become frequent. The term " colonization " is 
dropped from the title and the society became more active. 
The abolition element had again gotten control. At their 
meeting in September, 1825, eighty -one delegates reported 
from twenty-eight branches, as follows: New Garden, Deep 
River, Centre, Caraway, Springfield, Deep Creek, Westfield, 
Trotter's Creek, Cane Creek, Emanuel Branch (?), Ebenezer 
Branch, Rocky River, Uhwarrie, Newberry, Maire's Creek, 
Tabernacle, South Fork, ]Muddy Creek, New Salem, Shi- 
loah, Union, Hunting Creek, Prospect, Bethel, and Dover; 
while eight branches were not represented: Reedy Fork, 
Brushy Creek, Hillsborough, Greensborough, Beans 
Shoals (?), Rehoboth, Mount Olivet, and Mure's Chapel. 
At this time we find fifteen branches reporting four hundred 
and ninety-seven members. If we take this as a basis of 
estimation, there were probably some 1,150 members in the 
State. They sent material to Lundy for the Gtnms, and 
the president's address for this year was published in the 
J Vi's/trn Caro/iniau, of Snlishury. Much anti-slavery matter 
was published by William Swaim, a young man of rare tal- 
ent, in the Greensboro Patriot, a paper which he had just 
founded. Levi Cofifin says: "He advocated the manumis- 
sion of slaves, and though he met with a storm of opposi- 
tion and was assailed by other papers, he continued his 
course boldly and independently. He received letters from 
various parts of the State full of threats and warnings. 
These he published in his paper, and replied to them in 
editorials. Many public speakers and waiters engaged in 
discussion with him, but they could not cope with him, and 
generally retired from the combat much worsted." ' 

The emancipation society said that there were then no 
newspapers in the State that were earnestly engaged in de- 
fending slavery, 1)ut contemplated establishing a press of 
its owii." A number of (|Ucstions were propounded and dis- 
cussed, such as the cost of suppressing the slave trade; the 



' Reminiscences, 7S, 74. ' Moses Swaim, in annual address, 1826. 



Southern Quakers and Slavery. 241 

cost and extent of the internal slave trade; to what extent 
should emancipation to Hayti be encouraged? to Liberia? 
One question is of particular interest to us. In answer to 
the question whether the majority of the citizens of North 
Carolina opposed slavery, they estimate that two-sixtieths 
were for immediate emancipation; three-sixtieths for gradual 
emancipation; four-sixtieths supported schemes of emigra- 
tion, etc.; thirty-six sixtieths were ready to support schemes 
of emancipation; three-sixtieths had neither thought on nor 
cared for the subject; nine-sixtieths opposed emancipation 
because impractical; three-sixtieths were bitterly opposed to 
emancipation.' 

In 1826 twenty-three branches reported about 1,000 mem- 
bers. It was thought there were some 1,600 members in all. 
Some of them, as we have seen, were slaveholders, for many 
slaveholders favored gradual emancipation. We find four 
female branches mentioned. They had their headquarters 
at Jamestown, Springfield, Kennet, and Centre, all Quaker 
strongholds. In 1827 forty branches were reported; they 
s'ent Benjamin Swaim as a delegate to the Abolition Society 
and also sent a memorial to Congress. From this time on 
the society began to fail; members began to grow careless 
and the branches did not send representatives. It met for 
the last time at Marlborough, in Randolph County, July 25, 
1834. They voted to continue their meetings, but did not. 
They had been drawing closer to the Free Produce Society 
of Pennsylvania and to similar abolition movements. The 
tem.per of the times was changing in North Carolina, and 
the Manumission Society drifted until it ceased to have an 
organization save as a part of the Underground Railroad. 

Such was the contribution of North Carolina Friends to- 
ward tb- solution of this much-vexed problem. They failed 

^ Poole, Anti-Slavery Opinion before 1800 (p. 72), quotes Lundy 
in saying that in 1827 there were 130 abolition societies in the United 
States, of which 106 were in the slave States. There were eight in 
Virginia, twenty-five in Tennessee with a membership of one 
thousand, fifty in North Carolina with three thousand members. 



242 SoutJicni (Jttalrrs and Slarcry. 

to accomplish the end aimed at, but it was not for lack of 
effort. They contributed of their energy and money, and 
were not less lavish with the leaders whom they gave to the 
anti-slavery cause. Most notable among these, perhaps, 
were Charles Osbom, Vestal Coffin and Levi Coffin. The 
work of Charles Osborn has been noticed already. \'estal 
Coffin organized the Underground Railroad near the pres- \ 
ent Guilford College in 1819. Addison Coffin, his son, en- j 

tered its service as a conductor in early youth, and still sur- 
vives in hale old age, the last of the men who served it 
prior to 1836. Vestal's cousin, Levi Coffin, became an anti- 
slaver}' apostle in early youth and continued unflinching to 
the end. His early years were spent in North Carolina, 
whence he helped many slaves to reach the West.' In 1826 
he followed them. Here he worked incessantly, and was 
for thirty years the reputed president of the Underground 
Railroad. 

Thus did the South give of its own sons to the solution 
of the problem. Southern men had been the ones to ex- 
clude slavery from the Northwest Territory; they had voted 
to abolish the slave trade after 1808; and the next genera- 

' It should be noted that such action as this on the part of indi- 
viduals was disavowed by the Society as a whole. In 1843 the 
North Carolina Yearly Meeting, in order '" to make known our long 
established practice and utter disa])proval of such interference any- 
way wluitever," condemns those Friends who had given '"shelter 
improperly" to slaves. The Rich Square Monthly Meeting was still 
more distinct in its i)osition. In 1843 it says : ' ' Whereas it is a well- 
known testimony of the Society of Friends that they do not allow 
their members to hold slaves or in any way interfere with the sys- 
tem of slaverj' furtlier than by petition, reason, and remonstrance 
in a peaceable manner. And it having through rej)ort come to the 
knowledge of the body of Society that some one or two of tlie mem- 
bers thereof have suffered tlieniselves to be so far overcome through 
sympathy as to allow and give shelter imi)rop(-rly to one or more 
slaves and thus occasioned several of their fellow members to be 
accused of the like improj)er conduct we liave therefore thought it 
due to oiirselves and to tlie ])eople at large of the country in which 
we live thus to make known our long eslablislied practice nnd utter 
disaj)|)roval of such inlerfiTencc in any way whatever, wliile at the 
same time we do not in the least degree reliutjuisli our testimony to 
the injustice of slavery." 



Southern Quakers and Slavery. 243 

tion was to furnish many of the men who were most useful 
in its final destruction. 

It is to be noted also that during the whole of this period 
the anti-slavery sentiment was strong in Virginia. This sen- 
timent is shown clearly by the great debates in the Virginia 
Assembly in Januar}^, 1832, on the question of gradual 
emancipation. This debate was precipitated by the Nat 
Turner insurrection in August, 1831. Emancipation was 
advocated by most of the leading men of the day, includ- 
ing Mr. Moore, of Rockbridge; Mr. Rives, of Campbell; 
Mr. Preston, who was aftenvards in Taylor's cabinet; George 
W. Summers, afterwards member of Congress; Thomas J. 
Randolph, the grandson of Jefferson; Thomas Marshall; 
James McDowell, Jr., afterwards governor of Virginia and 
member of Congress ; and Charles J. Faulkner, M. C. and 
minister to France. While there were members who denied 
the advisability of action, there were none who defended the 
principles of slavery. The Whig- and the Enquirer were 
both equally vehement in their denunciations of the institu- 
tion. 

It would be an error, however, to assume that Friends 
in Virginia were responsible for any large part of this strong 
feeling toward emancipation. They did their duty in this 
respect just as they did in North Carolina, but they were too 
few in numbers and not widely enough distributed geo- 
graphically to be of great influence; besides, the most of 
their members had gone to the West. 

It is also worthy of note that Carolina Friends were both 
abolitionists .and colonizationists, while Virginia Friends 
were neither, but emancipationists instead. The action of 
Virginia Friends in the matter of slavery was far more tem- 
perate. They condemned both the colonization and aboli- 
tion movements; North Carolina Friends worked at first 
with the colonization movement, and from that drifted into 
the more comprehensive program of abolition. 

After the beginning of the present century the appeals 
to the State Assembly by North Carolina Yearly Meeting 



244 Soutlivrn Quakers (Did iSlareri/. 

become fewer. In 1816 they sent their first petition to Con- 
gress, and from 1835 slavery becomes relatively less impor- 
tant, while the use and abuse of whiskey, distilling, etc., be- 
come more so. This had been the case in the Virginia 
Yearly jMeeting since about 1800. 

This change seems to have been due to two causes. In 
the first place the people of North Carolina by reason of 
the invention of the cotton-gin were beginning to assume 
a reactionary attitude in favor of slaveiy. This reaction 
was hastened by Nat Turner's rebellion, w-hich checked the 
^ rising tide of emancipation, caused the South to be armed, 
made her people more sensitive, and predisposed them 
against agitation of the question. 

In the second place, and this is the principal reason. 
Friends were considerably reduced in numbers in North 
Carolina. Those who remained were more indifferent to 
the question and were less able to cope Avith the growing 
power of the institution; for its most earnest opponents were 
already gone. Southern society was becoming more and 
more divided into the slaveholding aristocracy and the pro- 
letariat. The economic competition of the two was becom- 
ing more oppressive. The non-^laveholding middle class 
was disappearing. They had risen to the ranks of the aris- 
tocracy or had sunk to that of the proletariat: or, w'hich 
was more frequently the case, had gone to the West. This 
brings us to the migration. 






N 



CHAPTER X. 

Southern Quakers and the Settlement of the 
Middle West. 

The greater expansion of the American RepubHc was 
made possible by the victory of George Rogers Clark in 
1778-79. Organization of this Northwest Territory began 
as soon as the Revolution terminated. It was perfected in 
the Ordinance of 1787. This Ordinance provided for not 
less than three, nor more than five, States north of the Ohio 
River: Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Wisconsin, Michigan, have 
been the resultant States. Thus wer^ laid the foundations of 
what is to us the Middle West, perhaps better known as 
the Old Northwest. The feature of vital importance to the 
Society we are studying was that under this Ordinance 
neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except for crime, 
was to be allowed in any of this territory, and with a legal 
guarantee in the organic law of the territory it became a 
fit home for men who found themselves driven to migration 
by the institution in the South. 

Population began to flow into the country at once. The 
first permanent settlement was at Marietta, Ohio, in 1788. 
In 1800 the Northwest Territory, including Ohio, had 
50,240 inhabitants. Ohio was erected into a separate ter- 
ritory in 1800, and admitted into the Union in 1803. After 
cutting ofT Ohio the remaining country was erected into In- 
diana Territory; Michigan was set o& in 1805, and Illinois 
in 1809. In 1810 Indiana had 24,520 people, and IlHnois 
12,282, which also included Wisconsin and a part of Min- 
nesota. 

The country was rich in natural resources. There were 
no grave obstacles- in the way of its peaceful conquest save 
Indians and distance. The first were overcome as their 



24G Southern Quakers and Slavery. 

eastern fellows had b-'on, and the other was lessened by 
providing a new and improved roadway. Before this was 
done, settlers made their own roads with axes, guarding 
themselves in the meanwhile from attacks by the savages. 
Since the settlement of the Middle West there has been 
a complete reversal of the relations between roads and mi- 
gration. Railroads are now built into new sections to open 
them up for occupation. They now precede settlement; then 
roads followed settlement. The great road to follow the 
western migration was the Cumberland or National Road. 
It extended from Cumberland, Md., through Wheeling, Va., 
across the Ohio River into Ohio and Indiana. It was be- 
gun in 1806; was completed to Wheeling in 1821 ; reached 
Columbus in 1827 and Indianapolis in 1830. With this 
road completed. Friends of Virginia and the Middle States 
found traveling much easier than in earlier days, but Friends 
have always shown a defiant enthusiasm in overcoming dif- 
ficulties. 

It does not appear that this route was used much by emi- 
grants from North Carolina. There were several routes for 
parties removing from central North Carolina, and many 
Friends who proposed going west from eastern North Caro- 
lina first went up into the central part of the State. 

1. One route was by w^hat was known as the Kanawha 
road. This led through a rough, mountainous country for 
most of the way. " Crossing Dan River, it led by Patrick 
C. H., Va., to Marberry's Gap in the Blue Ridge mountains, 
thence across Clinch Mountain, by way of Pack's Ferr}^ on 
New River, thence over White Oak mountain to the falls 
of the Kanawha, and down that river to the Ohio, crossing 
at Gallipolis." ' 

2. Another route was known as the Kentucky road. By 
this road the traveler crossed the Blue Ridge at Ward's Gap, 
crossed New River near Wythe C. H., Va., thence by way 
of Abingdon, thence through Cumberland Gap. and through 
Kentucky to Cincinnati.' 

' Levi Coffin's Rcviiiiisceiiccs. 34, 60. 



Settlement of the Middle West. 247 

3. A third route was by way of Poplar Camp and Flour 
Gap; through Brownville and Lexington, Ky., and across 
the Ohio at Cincinnati, Lawrenceburg or Madison. This 
route was very rough. 

4. The fourth was known as the Magadee route and lay 
over the Virginia turnpike, which had been built from 
Richmond to the Ohio at the mouth of the Kanawha. This 
was a favorite route from 181 o until the age of railroads. 
Emigrants from the eastern part of North Carolina would 
sometimes go to Richmond direct, while others would strike 
the pike at Lynchburg or Fincastle, while still others from 
Carolina would turn off the pike at Lewisburg, go by another 
pike route to Wheeling and cross the Ohio there. It is 
said that as many went by this route as by all the other 
routes.' 

The first emigrants to the West went on horseback with 
pack-horses. They followed the buffalo trails, for where 
a buffalo could go a horse could go. All the women and 
the boys above twelve carried guns, and sentries were sta- 
tioned at certain points, but whether this was a custom of 
Quakers we are not told. When two-horse wagons and 
two-wheeled carts came into use a little later it was neces- 
sary to double or treble the teams in crossing the moun- 
tains; a man was put at each wheel to push; there were 
from two to four behind for the same purpose and two to 
chock.' These vehicles were usually covered v/ith muslin 
or linen. Some had no paint, but were pitched with tar 
instead, while the horses were hitched to them with husk 
collars and rawhide traces.^ The movers took with them 
cooking utensils and provisions; traveled in the day; 

'Addison Coffin, in Chdlford Collegian. Vol. IV.. 1891-92. He 
says also that the emigrants carried most of the money in circula- 
tion out with them, and that as late as 1840 notes on the Bank of 
Cape Fear or on the State Bank of North Carolina were considered 
as good as gold even in Cincinnati- For a valuable treatment of the 
Kentucky route, see also Speed's Wilderness Road (Louisville, 1886). 

^Coffin, as above. 

= Annals of the Pioneer Settlers of the White Water Valley. 



248 >^outhrrn Qtidh'rfi (Did i^larrri/. 

camped out at niglit, and went singly or in companies. The 
women rode in the wagons or on horseback, and these 
companies were frequently followed at a short distance in 
tlie rear bv runaway negroes who took this opportunity 
to make their way to the land of freedom.' 

When we come to study these Quaker migrations in de- 
tail there is little to differentiate those of one State from 
those of another. They went in substantially the same way, 
but owing to difference in location pursued different routes. 
The more southern Quakers frequently took the Kanawha 
or the Kentucky route. \^irginia Quakers would follow the 
more northern routes, and in the later period the Cumber- 
land road. There is little difference in time either; but at 
first North Carolina Quakers went very largely to Tennes- 
see, while Virginia Quakers, being nearer, went directly to 
Ohio. In this way Virginia Quakers took possession of 
Ohio, while North Carolina Quakers pressed on to Indiana. 
The differences in destination and time give us sufficient 
reason to narrate the Virginia migration first. 

As early as 1769 some Friends from Virginia had founded 
Union Town on a tributary of the Monongahela in Penn- 
sylvania, and when Zebulon Heston and John Parish were 
returning from a mission to the Indians in Ohio in 1773. 
they had some religious service with Friends in that newly 
settled district. Warrington and Fairfax Quarterly I\feet- 
ing, to w'hich these Friends belonged, reported to the 
Yearly Meeting, in 1776, that eighteen families of Friends 
were then residing west of the Alleghanies about Redstone, 
Union Town and Brownsville. They are mentioned in 
the records of Western Quarterly Meeting in 1777. A 
committee from Hopewell Monthly Meeting visited them 
in 1780 and reported that there were more than 150 persons 
there. This committee allowed them to hold a regular meet- 
ing in the new schoolliouse on the west side of the Mononga- 
hela River. Friends who settled near Redstone in Fayette 

'Levi Coffin's Rtniiinisccncefi. 'di pasifim. 



Settlement of the Middle West. 249 

County left their certificates at first with Hopewell Monthly 
Meeting. Westland, in Washington County, established in 
1782, was the second meeting. Westland Monthly Meeting 
was established in 1785, and Thomas Scattergood mentions 
four particular meetings in 1787. There was a rapid in- 
crease from this date. Martha Routh mentions eight par- 
ticular meetings and two monthly meetings in 1795- Ten 
years later it was computed that there were not less than 
eight hundred families of Friends w^ho had migrated to Ohio 
alone.' 

The first of the settlers going West stopped naturally in 
Ohio. As there were then no Friends' meetings in that 
territory, they left their certificates at Westland and Red- 
stone in western Pennsylvania. The first certificate to West- 
land which I have discovered is dated June 24, 1785; it 
comes from Fairfax Monthly Meeting, Virginia, and is for 
John Smith. It is to be noted also that most certificates 
to Westland and Redstone came from Virginia meetings. 
The migrations of Carolina Friends to this part of the West 
were few until after the establishment of the Ohio meet- 
ings. After 1785 certificates from Virginia monthly meet- 
ings to Westland and Redstone became numerous; about 
half of them represent families, some of them being young 
couples who turned to the West for their fortunes. Others 
had numerous children; many were young men and maid- 
ens; but no period of life seems to have been wdthout rep- 
sentatives. It is literally true to say that there were emi- 
grants from the cradle to the grave. Those Friends who 
took certificates to Westland and Redstone were but the 
advance-guard of the western migration. They continued 
to go to these meetings for a year or two longer; thus 
South River sent twelve to Westland in 1801, and the south- 
ern Goose Creek sent fifteen in 1801 and 1802, of which 

' See Sutcliff's Travels in America, 235 ; Bowden. II., 378-79 ; T. 
Scattergood's Journal, in Friends^ Library, VIII., 14-17 : Martha 
Routh's Journal, ibid., XII., 440, and Records of Hopewell Monthly 
Meeting. 



250 Southerii QudJicrs and Slavery. 

thirteen were for families, besides a considerable number 
sent before the beginning of the present centur}-. Meetings 
were soon established within the Territory, and then West- 
land soon disappears as a stopping-place. Thus, in 1802, 
we find certificates from South River to " Concord [Monthly 
Meeting, Northwest Territory," but this name almost im- 
mediately gives place to " Concord Monthly Meeting, State 
of Ohio," and the migrations at once become very numer- 
ous. During the first ten years of the century most of 
the emigrants went from Crooked Run, Hopewell, South 
River and the tw-o Goose Creek ^Monthly ^^leetings; during 
the second decade they went from Hopewell, South River 
and the southern Goose Creek Monthly Aleetings. The 
migration from the northern Goose Creek and Hopewell 
became active again about 1825, and continued so until 
1836. The meetings in Virginia which belonged to Balti- 
more Yearly Meeting were the first to send out settlers, for 
tfiey were nearer the western country and had less to hold 
them in the way of local associations. From 181 2-1 6 there 
was a considerable migration from the lower meetings of 
the Virginia Yearly Aleeting. Again, 1824-34, migration 
from lower Virginia was sharp. From such records as I 
have been able to examine I have found that between 1801- 
40 there left the Virginia meetings for the West 349 fam- 
ilies and 363 single persons. In the latter class there were 
many young women, and they took care that their certifi- 
cates bore witness to the fact that they were clear both 
of debt and marriage entanglements. These were all Qua- 
kers, but it probably does not represent all of them. It 
represents those only whose certificates of removal I have 
seen, and I have not seen all the records, for some have 
been lost. Of the meetings belonging to the Virginia 
Yearly Meeting, South River furnished the greater number 
of emigrants. I explain this as due in part to the foreign 
element among the Quakers in this section. L^'om this 
meeting there went eighty-six families and forty-three sin- 
gle persons, tlic-ir removal covering the whole fort\- years. 



Settlement of the Middle West. 251 

In the same way migTations from the southern Goose Creek 
began with the century, were to Westland first and then to 
Ohio. These removals sapped the hfe of the meeting and 
it was laid down in 1814. In 181 1 the movement began 
among all the lower meetings. It is impossible for us to 
say how much the figures presented a little later might 
have been modified by others which have been lost. Emi- 
grants from Virginia went largely to Ohio. Those who 
took certificates to Indiana meetings belong to the later 
period. There was also a tendency — we can hardly speak 
of it more definitely than a tendency — for Friends from the 
same section to settle close together in the new country. 
This was true both of families and neighborhoods. The 
greater part of these removals take place early in the cen- 
tur}^, but some lingered in their old homes until near the 
middle. In 1857 a number had then recently removed from 
Fairfax Quarter, Virginia, and settled at Prairie Grove, 
near Mount Pleasant, Iowa.' 

The first migration from North Carolina to the West 
was not made to the region north of the Ohio, nor was 
its purpose to escape from slavery. The general movement 
from North Carolina westward began as early as 1768. 
These adventurers passed over the Alleghany Mountains 
and laid the foundations of Tennessee. Others followed 
closely in their wake because of the political and economic 
troubles that culminated in North Carolina in 1771 in the 
War of the Regulation. In this struggle we have seen 
that Hermon Husband, formerly a Friend, was a leader. 
We cannot tell how many Friends were in this migration. 
We are certain there were some. 

We are certain that the expansion of Quakerism toward 
the South was checked by the Revolution. But the migra- 
tory spirit of the Quaker was irrepressible, and his line of 
movement was simply deflected from the South to the West. 
As early as 1784 w-e find indications that Friends were 

^Memoirs of S. M. Janney, 163. 



2~t'2 Soiitlnrii (^hnikcrs (iiid Shir<ri/. 

then at Xolichucky in eastern Tennessee. They left their 
certificates with Xew Garden Monthly Meeting. In 1787 
Friends located at Lost Creek, near Holston River, requested 
from that monthly meeting- the right to hold meetings. But 
their request was refused, and complaint was lodged that 
Friends had settled on lands the title to which was still 
in dispute with the Indians.' They were therefore reported 
back to the monthly meetings from which they came and 
were advised to move off the Indian lands. But these set- 
tlers were something more than Friends; they were pio- 
neers as well and had imbibed the spirit of their surround- 
ings, for in 1 79 1 a committee reports that these Friends had 
not paid the Indians for their lands and were also holding 
meetings without authority. This tendency to move was 
so strong and caused Friends so much trouble that the 
Western Quarterly ^Meeting passed the following minute 
in 1792: " Taking into consideration the case of Friends 
removing to the back settlements & the difficulty and dan- 
ger some have been reduced to and trouble they have 
brought on Friends thereby, For preventing of which this 
meeting do give it as our sense & judgment that no Friend 
do remove and settle out of the limits of a ]\Ionthly Meet- 
ing without first applying to and having consent of the 
^lonthly and Quarterly Meeting to which they belong: 
which bounds the Quarterly Meeting is to be the judge of." 
But the minutes of Friends in quarterly meeting assem- 
bled were powerless against the spirit of migration. In 
1795 a monthly meeting was established at Xolichucky, in 
Greene County, under the name of New Hope; in 1796 a 
meeting-house was erected at Lost Creek, in JefTerson 
County; in 1802 the two were established as Xew Ho])e 
and Lost Creek Quarter and still report to X^'orth Carolina 
Yearly Meeting. These emigrants were drawn mostly from 
meetings in central North Carolina. Thus we find among 

' For an account of some of these disputes see my paper on 
General Joseph Martin and (lie War of the I\Cvolntion in the West- 



Settlement of the Middle West. 253 

them, 1 795-1806, from Cane Creek Monthly Meeting, mem- 
bers of the famihes of Marshall, Hodgins, ?\Iaxwell, Pearce, 
Stanfield, Phillips; from New Garden, Thornburgh, Macy, 
Barnard; from Springfield, Mendenhall, Beales, Hayworth, 
Reece, Beard. 

Peter Yarnall visited these meetings in 1796. Early the 
next year Joshua Evans was among them. His journal 
will give us an idea of the difficulties to be encountered 
in going West, and also of the number of Friends beyond 
the mountains. Evans had visited all the meetings in 
Georgia and South Carolina, and from the latter State " set 
out with a prospect of trying to get to Tennessee, be- 
yond the Alleghany mountains, having four Friends from 
Bush River who had given up to go with, and assist 
me. With two horses to my light wagon, we travelled 
about fifty miles the first day, and camped in the woods, 
near the head of the river Seluda. Next day we crossed 
the Blue mountain, and camped again in the woods. The 
wind blew cold, but I felt inward comfort and support, 
which was as a staff to lean upon. Next morning we set 
forward, and in the evening reached a house where we were 
kindly entertained. This was refreshing to my body: for 
I had not been much used to lodge in the woods. . . . On 
the fourth of fourth month [1797], after going about thirt}- 
miles, we arrived at New Hope, in the Tennessee countrs^; 
and the next day were at their fourth day meeting of Friends, 
where a marriage was accomplished. We then traveled 
about sixty miles, a part of the road being very bad, to 
Lost Creek, where a number of our Friends are settled. 
. . . Traveling about eighteen miles, I had a meeting with 
a few Friends at Grassy Valley, beyond Holstein river; and 
in the evening, another opportunity with Friends only, to 
good satisfaction. ... I was at a meeting called Limestone, 
which was a comfortable season. Having been at the! 
farthest part of my journey in Georgia and Tennessee, we 
came about 150 miles in four days to Little Reedy Islands; 
the roads in places being very difficult. In traveling along. 



254 Southern Quakerti and Slavery. 

we saw and met very many people, men, women and chil- 
dren, going towards new settlements. . . . My concern was 
increased, on beholding brethren and fellow professors too 
incautious in respect to such hasty removals." They then 
visited the settlement of Friends in Grayson County, Va., 
w^hich were in part a product of the new westward impulse. 

" We passed on to a place called Chestnut Creek, on 
the Blue Ridge, where were a few Friends, with whom 
we had a comfortable meeting next day. . . . We then had 
meetings at Big Reedy Island, and Little Reedy Island, 
also one near the top of the Blue Ridge at a private house 
not far from Ward's Gap, which was comfortable to me. 
Coming down this high mountain, .... we came again 
into North Carolina. ... I was likewise concerned to 
caution Friends against a disposition that leads to unsettle- 
ment, and to ramble farther out into remote places .... 
to show the great impropriety of the professors of Truth, 
sufifering their minds to be captivated with the love of a 
rambling, lazy life, or going to new settlements to seek a 
maintenance by hunting, &c."' This was for North Caro- 
lina the beginning of the westward migration. From Ten- 
nessee many drifted on, like Charles Osborn and William 
Williams, to the Northwest.' 

The leader and organizer of the Carolina hegira was 
Thomas Beales. He was the brother-in-law of Richard 
Williams, the first Quaker settler at New Garden, N. C. 
He came from Pennsylvania or Maryland to North Caro- 
lina. His first connection with the West we find noted 
in the journal of one of the exiles in Virginia in 1777-78: 

' Evans's Jourval, in Friends' Mi><cellany, X., 1837, 158-162. 

* Williams was a native of Chatham County, N. C, and had gone 
to Tennessee about 1800. In 1814 he removed to Indiana: "and 
havinj^ no company but our own faTuily. we i>assed along with 
much quietude and satisfaction, all tilings doing well with us. We 
arrivecl in nineteen days on the Elkhorn fork of the White Water, 
in Wayne county, where we have settled ourselves down in the 
woods, and feel satisfied in mind. We are four miles from White 
Water Monthly Meeting, of whicli we are members and two miles 
from our meeting for worship." — Journal, 171-172. 



Settlement of the Middle West. 255 

"nth day of nth month. — Thomas Bails and Wilham 
Robinson, from New Garden, in North CaroHna, visited 
us. They were on their w'ay to perform a reUgious visit 
to the Indians, for which they appeared to be under proper 
quahfications and resignation of mind; leaving all, and at 
the risk of their lives engaging in this service from a sense 
of duty and universal love to mankind, engaged our sym- 
pathy and desire that they should be preserved in this time 
of difficulty and danger in the arduous undertaking. Thomas 
Bails expects to spend the greater part of his days among 
the Indians; and having visited them before, he will be 
useful among them." ^ They returned home the next year, 
and in 1779 "Thomas Beales proposes removing near the 
Ohio river to be near the Delaware Indians." But the 
committee of Western Quarterly Meeting on his case re- 
ported that the " time of his removal is not yet come." In 
1780 the Quarterly Meeting agreed for him to go West to 
make inspection as to the advisabilit}^ of removing his 
family. In 1782 it was reported that he had removed and 
with him several other families, and he then requested liberty 
to appoint meetings. He is said to have been the first white 
emigrant to setde in Ohio. He died near Chillicothe, Ohio, 
in 1 801, and was buried in a coffin dug out of a log, for 
no dressed timber Avas available and there Avas not a\ 
saw-mill within hundreds of miles." 

The example of Beales and of those who accompanied 
him had its efifect. As early as 1792 the tendency of Friends 
to travel and settle in unexplored countries was also recog- 
nized by New Garden Quarterly Meeting, and a minute 
was passed by this meeting, as had been done by Western 
Quarter, forbidding such settlements except with the con- 
sent of the monthly and quarterly meetings, which were to 
have power to fix the limits of settlement; and as late as 
1799 the Yearly Meeting " recommends to the quarterly and 

' Gilpin's Exiles in Virginia, 183. 
^Levi Coffin's Reminiscences, 10. 



25G Southvnt (Juakcr.s and ^Slai■(:ry. 

monthly meetings to attend more strictly to the discipline 
in respect to Friends removing without the limits of any 
established meeting." We can easily imagine the amount 
of restraining influence this minute would exercise. We 
have seen already that there were Friends in eastern Ten- 
nessee; a number of meetings had licen recently established 
in Grayson County, Va., and in 1798 Westfield ^^lontlily 
Meeting requests advice on the removal of some of its 
members to the Scioto River " or thereaway." But the 
committee to whom the matter was referred wisely left 
Friends to do as they thought best in the matter. 

The first considerable movement of Friends from North 
Carolina direct to the West, excluding the migration to 
Tennessee, but contemporary with it, was not from the 
section of country where Thomas Beales was best known 
and had most influence, but from the section further to the 
east. It came from the Contentnea Quarter. It was em- 
phatic and sweeping in its character. It was literally a mi- 
gration. 

Fortunately for the historian, a letter written from Con- 
cord, Ohio, by Borden Stanton, one of the leaders of this 
migration, to Friends at Wrightsborough, Ga., who were 
also thinking of going West, and who did so at a later 
period, has been preserved. It reveals to us the motives, 
the troubles and trials of these modem pilgrims to an un- 
known land. It is dated 25th of 5th month, 1802: "Dear 
Friends, — Having understood by William Patten and Wil- 
liam Hogan from )our parts, that a number among you 
have had some thoughts and turnings of mind respecting 
a removal to this country; and .... as it has been the 
lot of a number of us to undertake the work a little before 
you, I thought a true statement (for your information) of 
some of our strugglings and reasonings concerning the 
propriety of our moving. . . . 

" I may begin thus, and .^a\- that for several years Friends 
had some distant view of uKn-ing out of that oppressive 
part of the lau'l, l)ut did nul know where until the vear 



Settlement of the Middle West. 257 

1799; when we had an acceptable visit from some traveling 
Friends of the western part of Pennsylvania. They thought 
proper to propose to Friends for consideration, whether it 
would not be agreeable to best wisdom for us unitedly to re- 
move northwest of the Ohio river, — to a place where there 
were no slaves held, being a free country. This proposal 
made a deep impression on our minds. . . . 

" Nevertheless, although we had had a prospect of some- 
thing of the kind, it was at first very crossing to my natural 
inclination; being well settled as to the outward. So I 
strove against the thoughts of moving for a considerable 
time .... as it seemed likely to break up our Monthly 
Meeting, which I had reason to believe was set up in the 
wisdom of Truth. Thus, I was concerned many times to 
weigh the matter as in the balance of the sanctuary; till, 
at length, I considered that there was no prospect of our 
number being increased by convincement, on account of 
the oppression that abounded in that land. . . . 

" Under a view of these things, I was made sensible, be- 
yond doubting, that it was in the ordering of wisdom for 
us to remove; and that the Lord was opening a way for 
our enlargement, if found worthy. Friends generally feel- 
ing something of the same, there were three of them who 
went to view the country', and one worthy public Friend. 
They traveled on till they came to this part of the western 
country, where they were stopped in their minds, believing 
it was the place for Friends to settle. So they returned 
back, and informed us of the same in a solemn meeting; 
in which dear Joseph Dew, the public Friend, intimated 
that he saw the seed of God sown in abundance, which ex- 
tended far north westward. This information, in the way 
it was delivered to us, much tendered our spirits, and 
strengthened us in the belief that it was right. So we un- 
dertook the work, and found the Lord to be a present 
helper in every needful time, as He was sought unto; yea, 
to be as ' the pillar of cloud by day and the pillar of fire by 



258 Southern Qtuikers and Slavery. 

night ' : and thus we were led safely along until we arrived 
here." 

The story of their departure from their old homes can 
be given substantially in their own words: "It appears 
by a copy of the minutes of a monthly meeting on Trent 
River, in Jones County, N. C, held in the ninth and tenth 
months, 1799, that the weighty subject of the members 
thereof being about to remove unitedly to the territory 
northwestward of the Ohio River, was and had been be- 
fore that time, deliberately under their consideration. And 
the same proposal was solemnly laid before their Quar- 
terly jMeeting held at Contentney on the ninth of the tenth 
month ; which, on weighing the matter and its circumstances, 
concluded to leave said Friends at their liberty to proceed 
therein, as way might be opened for them: yet the subject 
was continued till their next Quarter. And they having 
(before the said Monthly Meeting ceased) agreed that cer- 
tificates be signed therein for the members, to convey their 
rights respectively to the Monthly Meeting nearest to the 
place of their intended settlement showing them to be mem- 
bers whilst they resided there; such certificates for each 
other mutually were signed in their last monthly meeting 
held at Trent aforesaid, in the first month, 1800; w^hich 
was then solemnly and finally adjourned or concluded; and 
their privilege of holding it, together with the records of 
it, were delivered up to their Quarterly Meeting, held the 
1 8th of the same month, 1800." 

They stopped first at the settlement of Friends on the 
Monongahela River, in Fayette and Washington counties, 
Pennsylvania, to prepare for their new settlement over the 
Ohio. They brought their certificates with them, laid their 
circumstances, with extracts from the minutes of their former 
monthly and quarterly meetings in Carolina, before Red- 
stone Quarterly Meeting, and received the advice and as- 
sistance of Friends there. 

" Thus they proceeded and made their settlement in the 
year 1800; and were remarkably favored witli an opportunity 



Settlement of the Middle West. 259 

to be accommodated with a quantity of valuable land, even 
at the place which was chosen for their settlement by the 
Friends who went to view the country, before the office 
was opened for granting lands in that territory." Borden 
Stanton continues: "The first of us moved west of' the Ohio 
in the ninth month, 1800; and none of us had a house at 
our command to meet in to worship the Almighty Being. 
So we met in the woods, until houses were built, which 
was but a short time. In less than one year. Friends so 
increased that two preparative meetings were settled; and 
in last twelfth month, a Monthly Meeting, called Concord, 
also was opened, which is now large. Another preparative 
meeting is requested, and also another first and week day 
meeting. Four are already granted in the territory, and 
three meeting houses are built. Way appears to be open- 
ing for another Monthly Meeting; and I think, a Quar- 
terly Meeting. 

. ..." I may say that as to the outward we have been 
sufficiently provided for, though in a new country. Friends 
are settling fast, and seem, I hope, likely to do well." ^ 

This seems to have been the first considerable migration 
from North Carolina to the West. It seems also to have 
been the only case on record where a whole meeting went 
in a body. But it was not the only case of removal from 
Contentnea Quarter. Removals from this Quarter, either 
to the West or to the upper meetings of the same Quarter, 
continued until Carteret, Beaufort, Hyde, Craven and Jones 
counties were depopulated of Quakers and the meetings 
there laid down. Friends in these counties now reported 
to Core Sound Monthly Meeting, in Carteret County. Mi- 
gration from Core Sound began in 1799, when Horton 
Howard, secretary of the monthly meeting, took a certifi- 
cate to Westland. Josiah Bundy and Joseph Bishop also 

1 Friends' Miscellany, XII., 216-223. Stanton writes, Nov. 5, 1803, 
that he was then on his way to visit Southern Friends. He was 
doubtless instrumental in c mtinuing the work of removal. See 
also Records of Contentnea Quarterly Meeting. 



260 Southern Quakers and Slavery. 

removed to Westland that year. In 1802 ten parties ask 
for certificates; no destination is given, but we are justified 
in assuming that it was Westland or Concord. In 1802-04 
the movement was to Concord, Northwest Territory. There 
was then no more migration till 1831, when it was renewed, 
turning now to Wayne County, Ind. The monthly meeting 
was suspended in 1841 from lack of members. Stephen 
Grellet, who was among them in 1825, reports that there 
were then only about twenty Friends within the limits of 
the monthly meeting and that some of the meetings were 
kept up by the old negroes alone. Migrations began from 
Contentnea Monthly Meeting in 1800. Between 1800 and 
1 81 5 we find thirty-six certificates issued. Two were to 
Redstone, one to Indiana, and all the rest to Ohio, most 
of them to Concord. Between 181 5 and 1838 we find sev- 
enty-four certificates, all to Indiana with two exceptions. 
The movement was greatest in 1823, 1825, 1826, 1828, 1831, 
1832. The largest year was 1825. At the January meet- 
ing in that year ten certificates were asked for, which rep- 
resented thirty-six persons in all. Again at one meeting 
in 1826 five certificates, representing twelve persons, were 
asked for; in 1831 ten certificates represented twenty-seven 
persons. 

The foregoing covers all that we know concerning the 
migration from Contentnea Quarter. When we turn to the 
records of the Eastern Quarter we find the same story re- 
peated. During the first decade of the century there was 
a considerable number of removals from Sutton's Creek 
Monthly Meeting, in Perquimans County, to the meetings 
in central North Carolina, in Guilford and Randolph coun- 
ties. As we have already seen, this was in many cases only 
a preliminary chapter in the further removal to the West. 
Between 1797 and 181 1 there were twenty-two certificates 
of this character granted, nearly all of them being to Back 
Creek, in Randolph County. We find also that thirteen 
were given by Symons's Creek, 1803-11, to meetings in 



Settlement of the Middle West. 261 

central North Carolina; four were given by Piney Woods, 
1804-11; and six by Jack Swamp, 1800-02. 

The direct migration from northeastern North Carolina 
to the West does not begin until 1812. In 181 1 Zachariah 
Nixon visited Ohio and Indiana. The effects of this trip 
are immediately visible. In July, 1812, he applies for cer- 
tificates for himself and four sons to White Water, Ind. 
Five other certificates were also asked for. In August 
there were eight others ready to go. In 1816 applications 
were made for sixteen certificates; in 181 6 it was six; in 
1 81 8, six. These people went mostly to White Water, Lick 
Creek, and Blue River, and to a certain extent the emigrants 
of any one year settled within the verge of the same meet- 
ing. In 1812 it was White Water; in 1814 it was Lick 
Creek; in 1816-18 it was Blue River; in 1831-35 it was Mil- 
ford. The efifect of these migrations was soon painfully 
manifest. In 1835 Sutton's Creek Monthly Meeting was 
laid down and the meeting itself was attached to Symons's 
Creek Monthly Meeting. 

This meeting comes next, and its history has been already 
prefigured in the one just given. A considerable number 
had removed to central North CaroHna before 1810, and in 
181 1 the definite migration to the West began. The result 
was as usual, the particular meeting at the Narrows was 
laid down in 1839, t^^ ^^^ ^t Newbegun in 1845; i" 1846 
but fifty-live members were reported at Symons's Creek; 
in 1854 Little River preparative meeting was laid down, 
and in the same year, while the preparative meeting and 
the meeting for Vv^orship at Symons's Creek were kept up a 
little longer, the monthly meeting was laid down and the 
faithful remnant was joined to Piney Woods. 

The same story is largely true of Piney Woods Monthly 
Meeting. Between 1806 and 1830 we find twenty-nine cer- 
tificates of removals to the West. We know that the mi- 
gration was kept up beyond that date, and this alone of all 
the monthly meetings in northeastern North Carolina has 
been able to stand the constant drain on its members — this 



2G2 Southern Quakers and Slavery. 

constant recruiting for the West It became the heir of 
all the meetings that were suspended in Perquimans and 
Pasquotank counties, and in 1890 had a membership of 
three hundred and thirty-eight. Within the last generation 
a new meeting has been established at Up River, in Per- 
quimans County. This meeting, with Piney Woods, now 
represents all that is left of Friends in what were the first 
Quaker counties of the State. In 1800 there were three 
strong meetings in Pasquotank, with one monthly meeting; 
in Perquimans County there have been eight particular 
meetings. These are now reduced to two particular meet- 
ings, which are included in one monthly meeting. 

Rich Square and Jack Swamp monthly meetings belong 
to the Eastern Quarter. Westward migration begins from 
Rich Square in 1802, but the movement never took full 
possession of this meeting as it did of others. They seem 
to have been better situated and better satisfied with their 
surroundings than other Friends, and hence there were 
few who tried their fortunes in the West. Not so with 
Jack Swamp meeting, however. The movement began in 
1800 to central North Carolina; in 1805 it turned to the 
West. The monthly meeting was laid down in 1812. 

Fortunately for this work, the records of one monthly 
meeting have been preserved entire, and thus enable us to 
tell accurately what the migration from that particular local- 
ity was. These are the records of New Garden Monthly 
Meeting. We shall take the period 1801-66, two genera- 
tions, covering the period of the struggle against slavery 
and the removals affected by it. It was here also that 
Thomas Beales had preached his crusade against slavery 
and had proclaimed the West as a promised land. As we 
have already seen, a number of persons had gone West 
before the opening of the nineteenth century. But it was 
still undertaken with fear and trembling. In 1802 William 
Hunt asks advice about going West. The meeting leave3 
him at his liberty. During the first of these years there 
were a few certificates to Wcstland. Up to 181 5 nearly 



Settlement of the Middle West. 263 

all go to Ohio, but after 1815 most go to Indiana. After 
a careful examination it appears that two hundred and 
forty-five certificates were granted by New Garden Monthly 
Meeting to meetings in Ohio and Indiana between 1801 
and 1866. The following schedule representing single per- 
sons and families will illustrate the migration to the two 
States : 

Ohio. Indiana. 

Families. Single Persons. Families. Single Persons. 



I80I-II 


Z7 


22 


4 


I 


I8I2-I9 


15 


5 


21 


4 


1820-26 




I 


36 


16 


1827-46 






29 


19 


1847-66 






20 


15 



1801-66 52 28 no 55 

After studying these figures we must be astonished at 
the remarkable vitality which has been shown by this meet- 
ing in withstanding this constant strain on its members. 

New Garden Monthly Meeting was not alone among 
the meetings of central North Carolina in contributing to 
the population of the West. In 1824 a monthly meeting 
was established at Hopewell, about six miles from New 
Garden, by New Garden Quarter. It was laid down in 
1848. During its life of twenty-four years thirty-seven cer- 
tificates, representing twenty-three families, had been asked 
for. All of them went to Indiana without exception. The 
meeting disappeared as rapidly as it rose. 

Other offshoots of New Garden were the monthly meet- 
ings of Westfield (settled 1787) and Mount Pleasant (set- 
tled 1 801). The latter was composed of meetings that lay 
principally in Grayson County, Va, It seems to have been 
itself one of the preliminary steps in this system of State- 
building and lasted but a single generation. In 181 3 it 
was visited by WilHam WilHams: "Attended New Hope 
[Tenn.] Alonthly Meeting; and on first day had a large 
meeting at the same place, wherein I had service to good 



2tU Southern Quakers and Slavery. 

satisfaction; and on second day, had a meeting at Limestone 
[Tenn.] — nearly silent. Then, the four following days, we 
rode to the settlement of Friends in Grayson county, Vir- 
ginia; and stopped at the house of our kind Friend, Samuel 
Chew; he and most of his family being gone to meeting, 
we were kindly received by his daughter Alice. On seventh 
day we attended "Mount Pleasant Monthly Meeting, which 
was a favored one; as was also the meeting on first day, 
at the same place; so that we were made to rejoice in the 
Lord, and joy in God the giver of all good. 

" Second day, the first of the third month. We had a 
highly favored meeting near where Friends formerly held 
]\Iaple Spring meeting. Tliis last mentioned meeting had 
been laid down, by reason of so many Friends moving 
over the Ohio. On third day we had a meeting at Friends' 
meeting house, called Fruit Hill." ^ 

We have the records of the Mount Pleasant Woman's 
Monthly Meeting, 1802-25; most of these emigrants went 
to Ohio. This large proportion may be due to their as- 
sociation with the members of Virginia Yearly Meeting in 
Campbell and Bedford counties. Mount Pleasant Monthly 
Meeting was laid down in 1830, but it was not the only 
one to decay. Westfiield Monthly Meeting, its nearest 
neighbor on the south, lost bet\veen 1801-22 fifty-nine mem- 
bers, including thirty-six families. They went West and 
the monthly meeting was laid down in 1832. This left but 
one remaining monthly meeting in Westfield Quarter, and 
the quarter disappears the same year. 

Deep River is, and has been, one of the strongest monthly 
meetings. Its record of migration begins with 181 1 and 
extends to i860. As usual, they are all to Indiana except 
ten, which are divided between Tennessee, Ohio and Illinois. 
Between 181 1 and 1845 ^^^^ movement was quite unifonu. 
The favorite objective point was the White Water meeting, 
Tnd. Deep River, like New Garden, has had sufficient vital- 
ity to withstand this constant drain on its strength. 

^JournaL 129-131. 



Settlement of the Middle West. 265 

Between 1816 and i860 seventy-one certificates were 
granted by Dover Monthly Meeting; nearly all went to In- 
diana; a few stopped in Ohio; a few others went on to 
IHinois. 

The same story is true of the monthly meeting of Cane 
Creek. This is the oldest monthly meeting in central North 
Carolina. It dates from 1751. Before and during the 
Revolution it contributed largely to the meetings in South 
Carolina and Georgia. After the return of peace the emi- 
gration continued, but was deflected to the West. Quakers 
went from Cane Creek to Tennessee perhaps as early as 
1784. In the nine years between 1795, the date of the set- 
tling of the first monthly meeting, and 1804, we find twelve 
certificates to New Hope and Lost Creek monthly meetings. 
In 1804 the first parties went to Ohio. Five certificates 
were granted that year to Miami; seven were granted in 
1806; sixteen in 1807. The first one to Indiana was granted 
in 181 1. White Water was the first favorite; then comes 
Lick Creek; the migration was diminished, but not ended 
in 1836, the time limit of the records to which I have had 
access. 

The last monthly meeting in central North Caroling 
whose full records I have seen is that of Springfield. Its 
history is like that of the others. It was settled in 1791. 
Migration began to Tennessee in 1795. In 1798 Westland 
became an objective point; Concord, O., is first mentioned 
in 1803; the favorite stopping-place was Miami, in Warren 
County. In 181 1 they turned to White Water, Ind., and 
from this time nearly the whole stream of migration poured 
into that State. The records of Spring Monthly IMeeting 
I have seen only for the period 1831-39, but this was enough, 
the story is the same. 

This completes the survey of the meetings in North Caro- 
lina. When we turn to the meetings in South Carolina the 
result is the same. We shall find that they were not less 
aggressive and not slower than their brethren in North 
Carolina. We have already quoted the letter sent by Bor- 



266 i^onlhcrn (Quakers and Slavcnj. 

den Stanton in 1802 from Ohio to Wrightsborough, Ga, 
A similar inlluence was brought to bear on South CaroHna 
Friends. The leader in this critsade was Zachariah Dicks. 
He is in many respects a typical incarnation of the history 
of Southern Quakerism. Born in Pennsjdvania, he came 
to North Carolina about 1754 and settled in the Cane Creek 
section when it was still small. Here the greater part of 
his life was spent. He visited the meetings, preached among 
them and was a leader in the Society. He visited Europe 
between 1784 and 1787. He visited South Carolina be- 
tween 1800 and 1804; finally removed to Indiana and died 
there. His visit to the South Carolina meetings was full 
of moment to them. '' He was thought to have also the 
gift of prophecy. The massacres of San Domingo were 
then fresh. He warned Friends to come out from slaver)". 
He told them if they did not their fate would be that of 
the slaughtered islanders. This produced a sort of panic 
and removals to Ohio commenced." ^ South Carolina was 
also visited in 1800 by Joseph Cloud, another prominent 
minister of North Carolina Yearly Meeting. He had trav- 
eled in Europe, but particular stress is laid on the fact that 
he had been to visit meetings on " the western waters.'' 
The records of the Society tell us the object and result of 
his trip to South Carolina. 

In 1802 New Garden Quarterly Meeting had established 
a monthly meeting at Piney Grove, in ]\Iarlborough County, 
S. C, on the borders of North Carolina. These Friends 
began migrating in 1805, when one family went to Ohio; 
another followed in 1809; in 181 2 thirteen certificates were 
granted, all to Ohio. In 181 5 the migrations broke up the 
monthly meeting. 

The fortunes of Bush River Monthly ]\Ieeting, the most 
distinctive and strongest of the South Carolina meetings, 
are more pathetic still. Ramsay* says their removal was 

' O'Neall, Annalu of Newbei-i'if, 40. 

■ Histori/ of Sovtli'CaroHna, ed. 1859, II., 39. 



Settlement of the Middle West. 267 

due largely to the heavy importation of slaves before the 
limiting date of 1808. They sold their lands, worth from 
ten to twent}^ dollars per acre, for from three to six dollars, 
and departed, never to return/ Their own records can 
best tell the mournful tale. These records are very imperfect. 
They have felt the tooth of time and the hand of fire. They 
end practically with 1806, but they tell us enough. The 
migration began in 1802 and the first emigrants took cer- 
tificates to Westland. In 1803 certificates to Miami, Ohio, 
are found, and with five exceptions all the certificates granted 
1803-06 are to Miami or Little Miami. There were thirty- 
nine certificates to Miami in 1805; there were forty-two to 
Miami and Little Miami in 1806. Between 1803 and 1806, 
with a half-dozen in 1807, there were one hundred granted 
by Bush River Meeting to meetings in Ohio, and nine had 
been granted to Westland prior to 1803. Of these certifi- 
cates eight}^-six stood for families. Fir^ — that enemy of 
history — got in its work on the records from 1807, and 
we must turn to the records of New Garden Quarter for 
the end. Bush River Quarter had already disappeared. 
In 1808 the committee of New Garden Quarterly Meeting 
report that Bush River Monthly Meeting " appears to be 
in a low declining state." It seems to have been aban- 
doned about 1808, but not formally laid doAvn until 1822; 
they still had the privilege of holding a meeting for worship 
as late as 1837. Friends at Cane Creek, S. C, decHned to 
undertake to hold a meeting after 1809, and others had 
been laid down before this time. The committee reported 
in that j^ear that there were some five families (including 
persons without family), representing eighteen persons, at 
Cane Creek, in Union District, and thirty-two families, rep- 
resenting one hundred and thirteen persons, at Bush River. 
They were joined to New Garden Monthly Meeting. 
Wrightsborough Monthly Meeting had already been sus- 
pended, and nineteen certificates were granted by New Gar- 

' O'Neall, 40. 



268 Southern Quakers and iSlavery. 

den in 1809 ^o some of its remaining members to go to 
the West. 

Thus ends the career of Friends in South Carohna and 
Georgia. They had been there for two generations, and 
never, perhaps, has a rehgious faith disappeared so quickly 
from sucli a large expanse of territon,'- as did the Quakers 
from these two States. In 1799 they were quite strong, 
especially in South Carolina. Between 1797 and 1799 Abi- 
jah O'Neall and Samuel Kelly. Jr.. bought the military land 
of Jacob Roberts Brown, which lay mostly in Warren 
Count}'. Ohio, near Waynesville. O'Neall visited and lo- 
cated the land, and in 1799 "commenced his toilsome re- 
moval to his western home. When about starting he ap- 
plied to Friends for his regular certificate of membership, 
&c. This they refused him, on the ground that his removal 
was itself such a thing as did not meet their approbation." ^ 
Ten years later they had practically disappeared from both 
South Carolina and Georgia. The cause was the same — 
slavery'. 

To illustrate this emigration more graphically the follow- 
ing tables have been prepared, which will serve as a sum- 
mary for the last few pages. The first table shows the 
number of removals during each decade between 1800 and 
i860 and indicates the States to which the emigrants went. 
This table covers all the Quaker records that have been 
accessible to the writer. The second table gives a list of 
the princij:)al western meetings to which these certificates 
were directed. It shows that the influence of Virginia 
Friends was pre-eminent in Ohio, while the same was true 
of North Carolinians in Indiana. Following these tables 
is a list of the principal Quaker families that went to the 
West, with the meetings to which their certificates were 
directed. 

' O'Neall, 39. 



Settlement of the Middle West. 



269 



c a 

o og 
-co 

U O„o0 

.S.2c7 
5 cc 0) 53 

fu 



09 I- O . 



OT3 

^■5 



00 . ,_!.0 I ^ O TO o 

2o°S3o^S 
. "oi "BSh ■'•'•-xs'O 

M^H CO CO t-Oi 



o o >s' 

(DO O 

a d 



^-c] 



o o ^J" 



T "H • • ■ ^ 









o o 



£8 



B o c a c -^ o5 
o <D o o 4, rt err 

B ." .•-••" 

^ ^ _ --_-_- . CO C5 m CO a: -H M c . — , - 



CO OD 



1— t CO T-lCO03^-l 



31 o: I 






CO O ^ •* 00 CI 
CJ NN(Mi-li-i 



-* (M ffj CO rH l- 



•O -* OD— I 



' i-hM 
00 rH 



j^ CO -ocoe* 

■* -* • Ol rl 



CD-* OS t-lO 
COi-l rH 1— 1 



^ ^ 



rH N (M 



O COCO COC3 



■*aodb- 



(M eorH 

-* rHrH 



ro rH rH>n-*N 



lO IM CO rH 



f-t CO rH^ 
rH -.« CO-H 



t- CO <MN«OrH 



irH tn I 



t- 5. O 

- S ^ 

° "-^ ^' 

3 °o "S 

-M -H ® 

-a 






■^ ^ 2 



■<0 5 fe C3 O 



«^ 



u O 



CO --^ 

O eS 
C ^ 






o . 



<rH CO 
OcJjCO 
OOt-xl — ir 



COoOO 






go 



^^ 






T " '=' . I <o 

0- > n 



2 > 



^ o 






> a, o 
Sec 

^PhS 



= 3.2=/: 



o 



, o " 
5-00 o 



r; c c 3 >-.;i iP 



-y. M be : 

r- - C = 



270 



Southern Quakers and Slavery. 





•3 








•a 










Is 




S3 
o o 








5" 












O 4) 




















ca 








acJ 










Ci-"^ 




og aS 








M O 


'-^ 










M 


c s> 








o o 


a 








b: 


c t> 








p t^ 












-< 












fi 

s 

^ 








"S""* 


a 

H 

P4 


• o 








-"a 

• o 












t^ 








s 


o 




















a 








u 


























COM N 1-1 


CO 


000015010000 O CO.-( 


OS oo 00 o ea ■* OS 






1 "^^ 










e'j-«<co-» 


N O acOt-tDSD-t 


t-eii-^ 































oo^dS 



M On 

00-^00 






s - -^ 



oseoNOSN 



rl e* .N .N 



■* in to CO ■* «0 i-H «0 CO CD 00 N 

CO .-1 CO ct C0 1-1 



CO IN • t- -CO-* ••* 



■* ia<-iNNW(Nco 



1— I t~ -^ CO CO 1-1 CO t- O to iO i-l CO IM^ • -i-n-ICl 



CO 53 -oo 



t- OS N -H OSOOt-i-c 



§-,Ooo§So2 



^s 



CO to C3 Nrl 



tCOOOCOtH 



n a 



■•* • O t-cocoOS'*ao 

■•-" • -^ i-ilOi-ICO 



"2 --o ■ 

= >-> c 



^■o 



•"^ o S IS ;;; ^ C 2.— sj "5 a C — ,-' — ;: ^> ^ —S.~ 



CC 0*0 c^ 



■3 o , 
O 0)- 



- C 'O - 

,c£ - 

- ^u 

i - c 5 



3> O 

.a u 

fe5 



Cd4J 
J3 O 

a 



5) >i 






2 bo 



83 ri 



II 

a t- -J 

■Sea's 

n ' 

O 3.2 

;o 



a sc- 

o „ . 

g ® 00 

*j >. a 

n ^ 
I" cS 

o o S 
Sa-3 

SS-3 

» OS ti 
. <u 

a 3 

O 3 



Settlement of the Middle West. 271 

This covers the records of the meetings that have been 
accessible to me. It does not include the list of removals 
from the monthly meetings of New Hope and Lost Creek 
in Tennessee; nor of Centre, Back Creek, or Deep Creek, 
in North Carolina, and of Spring only in part. The reader 
must be cautioned further that these figures do not include 
women and children; they stand for heads of families or 
single persons. Further, some Friends went West without 
taking certificates, and others settled where there were no 
meetings, and so neglected taking them for this reason. The 
records used were incomplete in many places; some were 
inaccessible to the writer, and many have been destroyed. 
Fortunately for the student there is still another opportunity 
to show that these are figures below the true numbers. The 
Quakers, in the careful way that characterizes all their 
dealings with their own history, have registered these cer- 
tificates at both ends of the line. The records of White 
Water Monthly Meeting, Ind., will illustrate the extent of 
this movement. Timothy Nicholson, of Richmond, Indiana, 
who left North Carolina in 1855, writes me that bet\veen 
1809, the time that White Water Monthly Meeting was es- 
tablished at Richmond, and 1819, the records of the Friends 
show one hundred and twenty certificates for Friends from 
Cane Creek and Piney Grove Meetings, S. C, certificates 
for a thousand Friends (presumably including the women 
and children) from North Carolina, mostly from Guilford 
County, and eighty-five from eastern North Carolina, 
chiefly from Pasquotank and Perquimans counties. Miami 
and West Branch Meetings in western Ohio were established 
several years before the White Water Meeting, and many 
Friends from Virginia and the Carolinas settled there. 
Further, hundreds of Friends removed from the east to the 
central part of North Carolina between 1800 and 1830, and 
from here went on to the West; between 181 5 and i860 
hundreds of others went direct from eastern North Carolina 
to Ohio, Indiana and Illinois. Mr. Nicholson thinks it 
safe to say that if twelve hundred went to Richmond, Ind., 



979 



Southern QudJcrr.s and Slavery. 



direct between 1809 aiid 1819, not less than six thousand 
went from these four Southern States between 1800 and 
i860, of whom at least three-fourths went from North Caro- 
lina. In the same way Eli Jay writes me that the records 
of Miami Monthly Meeting show that about twelve hundred 
members were received by certificate in 1804, 1805 and 1806. 
They nearly all came from Virginia, North and South Caro- 
lina, Georgia and Tennessee. South Carolina contributed 
the greatest number, as we have seen. 

In the following lists the attempt has been made to give 
the names of those families which were the leaders in the 
westward migration, or which furnished the most recruits 
to it, from the various monthly meetings in the East. The 
names of the meetings to w^hich the particular families went 
have also been given, in most cases, with an approximation 
of the date. Thus Hopewell Monthly Meeting, Va., 
sent to Westland in Washington and Redstone in Fayette 
County, Pa., between 1786 and 1803, members of the family 
of Faulkner, Pcrviance, Townsend, Sidwell, Berry, Mills, 
Blackburn, Branson, Hodge, Lewds, Brock, White, Bailey, 
Smith, Roberts, Wells, Morris, Finch, Antrim; to Concord, 
O., it sent (1803-05): Lupton, Piggot, Jenkins, Pickering, 
Miller, Ellis, Steer, Bevin; to various other monthly meet- 
ings in Ohio (1804- ): McPherson, George, Walter, Wick- 
ersham, White, Walton, Wilson, Allen, Adams, Branson, 
Cope, Crampton, Faucett, Hackney, Janney, Lloyd, I ittle, 
Lupton, Pickering, Steer, Smith, Swayne, Townsend, Taylor. 

Fairfax Monthly Meeting. — To Redstone and ll'rst 
land (1785-1833): Smith, Stokes, Wharton, Davis, Hough, 
Ward, Mitchner, Plumber, Shine; to JSIiddlcton (1803-19): 
Smith, Sidwell, Beal, Beeson, Nutt, Payson, Whitaker, 
Bunting; to Short Creek, Harrison County, O. (1803-22): 
Lacy, Ball, Hague, Rattckir, Wood, Scluiley; to other Ohio 
meetings (1807-44): Wright, Richardson, Connard, Wilkin- 
son, Wood, Swayne, Janney, John, Myers, Wilson. 

Goose Creek Monthly Mei:tin<; (northern). — To Con- 
cord (1805-08): Evans, Pancoast, Sinclair, Spencer, Gregg, 



Settlement of the Middle West. 273 

White, Whiteacre, Canby, Dillon, Smith; to Salem, in Co- 
lumbiana County, O. (1806-07): Craig, Smith, Canby, Jan- 
ney, Gilbert; to Plainfield, O. (1810-19); Hough, Smith, 
Schirley, Alusgrave, Dillon, Hatcher; to other meetings, 
nearly all in Ohio (1820-54): Talbott, Buchanan, Rose, 
Hampton, Hughes, Nichols, Bradfield, Trehern, Mead, 
Wilson, Birdsall, Brown, Shoemaker, Taylor. 

Crooked Run Monthly Meeting. — To Westland and 
Redstone (1787-1803); Cadwalader, Reyley, Hank, Russel, 
Berry, Wright, Hunt, Richards, Mullen, Updegraff, Lupton, 
Wood, Evans, Cleaver, Yarnell, Painter, Dillhorn, Taylor, 
Holloway, Penrose, Miller; to Concord (1803-06): Faucett, 
Pickering, Wright, Lupton, Piggott, Holloway, Branson, 
Como, Smith, Wright, Sharp; to Miami, Warren County, 
O., but in Indiana Yearly Meeting (1805-07): Whitacar, 
McKay, Taylor, Smith, Cleaver, Garwood, Pusey, Harris, 
Rhea. 

Alexandria Monthly Meeting. — To Plainfield (181 5- 
24): Homer, Far, Faulkner; to Allum Creek, Morrow 
County, Ohio (1833-34): Elliott; to New Garden, Wayne 
County, Ind. (1833-39): Myers, Janney, Davis; to Honey 
Creek, Vigo County, Ind. (1840): Russell;' to others 
(181 5-51): Grubb, Neale, Patterson, Schofield, Ellen, Cemby, 
Sands, Little, Miller, Ross. 

Goose Creek Monthly Meeting (southern). — To West- 
land (1801-03): Oliphant, Erwin, Lewis, Morlan, Richards, 
Whitaker, Pidgeon, Schooley, Wright, Parsons, Sinclair; to 
Concord (1802-06): McPherson, Bond, Coffee, Broomhall, 
Pidgeon; to Miami (1812-14): Johnston, Johnson, Anthony, 
Lewis, Cadwallader, Harris; to other Ohio meetings: Em- 
bree, Rhodes, Morlan, Cole, Pennock, Curl, Perdue. 

South River Monthly Meeting. — To Westland (1801- 
02): James, Hanna, Baugham, Harris, Holloway, Terrell, 
Stratton, Ferrall, Carle, Via, Tellus; to Concord (1802-05): 

' Honey Creek Monthly Meeting has either been laid down or its 
name has been changed. 



274 Southern Quakers and Slavery. 

Pidgeon, Gregg, Bloxom, Wildman: to Salem (1805-07): 
Stanton, Carle, Macy, Gurrell, Fisher; to Miami (1806-19): 
Johnson, Bloxom, Terrell, Morman, Buttervvorth, Fisher, 
Dicks, Lodge, Butler, Davis, Welch, Bailey, Lewis; to Fair- 
field^ Highland Co., O. (1809-21): Barum, Timberlake, Bur- 
gess, Johnson, Stanton, Anderson, Coffey, Bloxom, Hollo- 
way, Plumer, Sparkman, Fox, Perdue; to other vieetings, 
mostly in Ohio : Redder, ]\Iiliner, Holloway, Fisher, Ferrall, 
Early, Moorman, Stratton, Johnson, Preston, Burgess, Bal- 
lard, Terrell, Lea, Cox, Cadwalader, Butler, Morgan, Bailey, 
Lynch. ., ^^., Ij^. 

Cedar Creek Monthly Meeting.-^TI? wSaZ-rw (1812-23): 
Stanley, Blackburn; to Short Creek {\%\y\\): Moorman, 
Terrell, ]\Iaddox, Hargrave, Creek; to others {1^12- ): An- 
thony, Johnson, Wilkins, Blackburn, Bates, Jordan, Lead- 
better. 

Gravelly Run Monthly Meeting. — To Springboro 
(1826-29): Peebles, Hunnicutt, Bailey, Binford, Lewis, 
Stanton, Walthal; to others (1822-30): Butler, Thomas, 
Peebles, Binford, Wrenn, Johnson, Hunnicutt, Sems, Wat- 
kins; nearly all to Ohio. 

White Oak Swamp Monthly Meeting. — To Ohio, 
meetings not specified (181 1-36): RatcHff, Crew, Ladd, Har- 
rison, Bates, Hockaday, Hargrave, Terrill, Andrews, Bin- 
ford, Johnson, Ricks; most of these went to Short Creek. 

Western Branch Monthly Meeting. — To Concord 
(1805-33): Bond, IMorlan, Curl, Johnson, Anthony, Lewis, 
Larow, Moorland, Perdue. Howell. Powell, Butler, Stanton, 
James, Draper, Ricks. Chapel, Hunnicutt, Trotter, Ricks, 
Lawrence; to Indiana (1829-33): Hare, Draper. Johnson, 
White, Hunnicutt, Andrews, Butler. 

Symons's Creek Monthly Miu-.ting. — To White Water, 
Wayne Co., Ind. (181 1-24): Morris, Symons, Trueblood, 
Tatlock, Bundy, Henby: to Lick Creek, in Orange County, 
Lid. (181 5): Trueblood, Morris; to Blue River, in Washing- 
ton County, Lid. (1816-32): Trueblood, Symons, Jordan, 
Morris, Cosand, Pritchard. White, V>q\ox\\ to Milford (now 



Settlement of the Middle West. 275 

Dublin), Wayne Co. (1829-44): White, Perisho, Bundy, 
Pike, Lamb, Albertson, Trueblood, Parker; /<? o^het^ meet- 
ings (181 1-54): Bogue, Sanders, Bundy, White, Trueblood, 
Elliott. 

Sutton's Creek Monthly Meeting. — To White Water, 
(1812-31): Nixon, Newby, Cox, Henby, Draper, Bogue, 
Guier, Haskett, Chappel; to Lick Creek (1814): Newby, 
Evans, Draper, Bogue, Willard, White, Lacy, Haskett, 
Chawner; to Blue River (181 5-31): Newby, Cox, Hollowell, 
Albertson, White, Moore, Charles, Hollowell, Cosand; to 
others (1820): Charles, Fletcher, Draper, Chappel, Nichol- 
son, Albertson, Haskett, Wilson, Nixon, Henby. 

PiNEY Woods Monthly Meeting. — To Ohio (1806-28): 
Goodwin, Smith, Harrel, Lamb, Elliott, Thornton, Bogue, 
Moore, Newby; to White Water (1816-30): Saint, Lamb, 
Wilson, Moore, Bundy; to other Indiana meetings {1^16- ): 
Elliott, Lamb, White, Newby. 

Rich Square Monthly Meeting. — To Short Creek 
(1805-41): Parker, Judkins, Peele; to other Ohio meetings 
(1802-25): Brown, Outland, Wilson, Patterson; to White 
Water (1819-26): Parker, Hall, Binford; to other Indiana 
meetings : Baker, Parker, Peele, Beamon, Outland. 

Jack Swamp Monthly Meeting. — To Short Creek 
(1805-11): Patterson, Maremoon (or Moreman), Taylor; to 
other Ohio meetings (1805-12): Patterson, Maremoon, Hicks, 
Crew, Reams. 

Core Sound Monthly Meeting. — To Westland (1799- 
t8o2): Howard, Bundy, Bishop, Dew, Ward, Mace, Stan- 
ton, Williams; to Concord (1802-04): Harris, Thomas, Scott, 
Williams, Mace; to New Garden (1832): Davis, Harris, Hub- 
bard, Perisho, Wilson, Mace, Fodra. 

Contentnea Monthly Meeting. — To Redstone {id^od): 
Thomas, Arnold; to Concord (1802-05): Hall, Edgerton, 
Outland, Doudna, Albertson, Dodd, Bailey, Morris; to 
other meetings in Ohio (1805-34): Copeland, Bundy, Col- 
lier, Cox, Price, Hollowell, Hobson, Spivy, Thomas, Peele, 
Hall, Jinnett; to Nezu Garden (1822-32): Arnold, Fulghum, 



276 So2ithrrn Quakcr.s and Slavcrij. 

Horn, Woodward, Barker, Bogue, Hall, Harris; to Honey 
Creek (1822-31): Cox, Arnold, ^lusgrave, Lancaster, Pike; 
to Bloomfield (1832-38): Morris, Outland, Overman, Horn, 
Hollowell, Colyer, Davis; to -other meetings in hidiana (1820- 
36): Cook, Newson, Parker, Davis, Arnold, Morris, Cox, 
Bishop, Coleman, Jinnett, Harris, Fellow, Hall, Barker, 
Arnold, Woodward, Overman, Kean, Boswell, Peele, Pike, 
Bundy. 

Cane Creek Monthly Meeting. — To Afiami [1804-oy): 
Edwards, Hobson, Stout, Doan, Cox, Kenworthy, Jones, 
Cloud, Carter, Morrisson, Grave, Harvey, Newlin, RatclifT, 
Pettott, Morrow, Rineand, Johnson, Hadly; to other meet- 
ings in Ohio (1805-09): Stanton, Haydock, Cox, Hadly, 
Baker, Clark, Hussey, Hasket, Moffit, Hale, Ratcliff; to 
White Water (181 1-24): Farlow, Moffit, Doan, Gifford, 
Cox, Comer (or Comer?), Ratcliff, Hadley, Allen, Carter, 
Williams, Ward; to Lick 6><f/f/(' (1814-34): Doan, Freeman, 
Dixon, Stout, Hadly, Rubottom, Wells, Gifford, Atkinson, 
Siler, Farmer, ]\Ioon, Marshall, Moore, Carter, Cox, ]\Tof- 
fitt, Stuart; to White Lick, in Morgan County, Ind. (1824- 
37): Hadly, Marshall, Allen, Johnson, Cashet, Pickett, Hin- 
shaw, Hobson, Vestal, Anderson, Lindley, Hockett, Dixon, 
Hill, Carter; to other meeti?tgs in Indiana (1822-37): Hob- 
son, Pickett, Newlin, Wheeler, Hinshaw, Wells, Hadly, Pike, 
Faust, Dixon, Hill, Stout, Hills, Puckett, Branson. 

New Garden Monthly Meeting. — 71^ J/zVrw/( 1804-09): 
Dillon, Leonard, Ozbum, Moore, Baldwin, Hoggatt, Hes- 
ter, Hodgson, John, Witty, Stanley, Hunt, Simmons, 
Knight, Thomburgh, Stephens: to Center, O. (1807-11): 
Hodgson, Starbuck, Cox, Thornburgh. Dillon, Moore, 
Hiatt, Coffin, Haskins; to Fairfield, Plighland Co., O. 
(1808-11): Hoggatt, Baldwin, Starbuck, Hoskins, Thorn- 
burgh, Hiatt; to other meetings in Ohio (1803-31): Hines, 
Hodgson, Perkins, Starbuck, Williams, Thornburgh, Plan- 
ner, Macy, Bunker, Low, l>rown, McMuir, James, Jenkins, 
Russell, Knight, Swain, Blizzard, Jcssop, Coffin, Hunt; to 
White Water (1810-37): Benbow, I'aldwin. Clark, Jcssop, 



Settlement of the Middle West. 277 

Hunt, Macy, Puckett, Cook, Hiatt, Williams, Johnson, Un- 
thank, Davis, Hubbard, Swain, John, Coffin, Moore; io 
Blue River (1816-24): Wilson, Hague, Macy; to Silver Creek, 
now Salem, in Union County, Ind. (1817-30): Gardner, 
Jessop, Macy, Bernard; to New Garden (1820-55): Jessop, 
Baldwin, Evans, White, Coffin, Unthank, Claton, Wilson; 
to Honey Creek (1820-24): Dicks, Hunt, Cox; to West 
Grove, Wayne Co., Ind, (1821-28): Coffin, Hunt, Jessop, 
Gordon, Baldwin; to Silver Creek (1822-33): Macy; to Mil- 
ford (1824-44): Hiatt, Coffin, Hubbard, Unthank, White, 
Clayton, Moore, Jessop, Stanley, Hunt; to other meetings 
in Indiana (1821-60): Farmer, Jessop, Stephens, Osborn, 
Hunt, Johnson, Benbow, Claton, Knight, Russell, Dennis, 
Moore, Cailbn, Holli ngswort h, Coffin, Stanley, Swain, Has- 
kins, Edwards, Foster, Hellam, Mendenhall, Woody, Clark, 
Davis, Macy7 Grey, Wilson, Rayl, White. 

Springfield Monthly Meeting To Miami (1804-10): 

Mendenhall, Smith, Millikan, Wright, Kersey, Tomlinson, 
Bundy, Hoggatt, Arnold, Harlan; to other meetings in Ohio 
(1803-32): Pidgeon, Reece, Newby, Kersey, Bundy, Tomlin- 
son, Mendenhall, Wright, Kellum, Beard, Harlan, Millikan, 
Spears, Spencer, Hoggatt; to White Water (iSi 1-2,1)'. Nixon, 
Mendenhall, Munden, Hoggatt, Symons, Hitchcock, Kersey, 
Millikin, Gilbert, Cook, Morris, Bell, Kendall, Moore, Pear- 
son, Bundy, Springs, Newby, Bond, Frazier, Garrett; 
to Lick Creek (181 3-21): Weeks, Coffin, Cook, White, 
Kersey, Tomlinson, Blair; to Blue River (1816-30): Blair, 
Coffin, Morris, Hoggatt, Cox, Overman, Beals, Bundy, 
Haworth, Albertson; to Mil/or d (1824-^1) : Boon, Kersey, 
Kendal, Hodson, Mendenhall; to White Lick, Hendricks 
and Morgan counties, Ind. (1825-50): Hodson, Beeson, 
Hoggatt, Kendal, Carter, Beals, Mendenhall, Albertson, 
Turner, Hunt, Harlan, Stalker; to other meetings i?i Indiana : 
Gilbert, Hodson, Barnet, Wickersham, Haworth, Boon, 
Bond, Kersey, Frazier, Gordon, Harlan, Mendenhall, Ken- 
dall, Hockett. 

Dover Monthly Meeting. — To Ohio meetings (1825- 



278 Southern Quakers and Slavery. 

49): Hunt, McPherson, Ballard, Homey; to Blue River 
(1816-36): Meredith, I^lcPherson; to White HWrr (1827-34): 
Brown, Stanley, Norton, Meredith, Jessop; to Duck Creek, 
Henr>^ Co., Ind. (1829-37): Henley, Stanley, Bownan, Cof- 
fin, Dean; to Neiu Garden (1831-38): Meredith, Eaves, 
Gurley, Homey; to other hidiana meetiyigs {i^^^o-^C)); Bow- 
ren, Camness, Pidgeon, Rich, Stanley, Harrold, Perkins, 
Starbuck; to Vermillion, Vemiillion Co., 111. (1831-33): Me- 
redith, Stanley, Gardner. 

Westfield Monthly Meeting. — To Miami (1804-14): 
Carr, Worley, Burns, Sumner, Beeson, Bond, Harrold, Wil- 
liams; to Fairfield, Highland Co., O. (1807-10): Burris, 
Grigg, Sumner, Horton, Puckett, McKinney, Beeson, Har 
rold, Hoggatt, Carson, Bond, Small; to Fall Creek, High- 
land Co., O. (1812-17): Ballard, Hiatt, Bond, Carson, Jes- 
sop; to White Water (1817-22): Denny, Puckett, Jessop, 
Chandler; to New Garde?i (1819-20): Puckett, Jackson; to 
Springfield (1822): Beales, Cook. 

Hopewell Monthly Meeting. — To White Water (1824- 
38): Hiatt, Coffin, Stanley, Middleton, Edwards, Rayl; to 
White Lick (1825-33): Hale, Edwards, Perkins; to Milford 
(1826-45): Macy, White, Edwards, Hunt; to Walnut Ridge, 
Rush Co., Ind. (1844-45): White, Ray, Cannaday; to other 
meetings in hidiaiia : Baldwin, Meredith, Perkins, Clark, 
Rayl, Macy, Hodgins. 

Deep River Monthly Meeting. — To Ohio meetings 
(181 1-37): Pike, Pegg, Cook, Jones, Stafford, Hubbard; to 
White Water (1811-59): Morris, Johnson, Gardner, Harris, 
Jessop, Horney, Pegg, Cook, Mills, Stewart, Clark, Pearce, 
Springer, Brown, Saunders, Ham, Mendenhall, Hiatt, 
Brooks, Baldwin, Elliott, Johnson, Beard; to Lick Creek 
(1814-21): Stanley, Henley, Howell; to Blue River (181 5- 
26): Coffin, Bundy, Stalther, Jessop, Starbuck, Pittman, 
Wilson; to White Lick (1826-44): Coffin, Jessop, Vestal, 
Thomas, Hubbard; to Milford (1829-57): Brown, Nixon, 
Coffin, Hubbard, Pitman, Brothers; to Springfield (1830- 
40): Beeson, Baldwin, Coffin; to Duck Creek (1833-42): 



Settlement of the Middle West. 279 

Beeson, Thomas, Robertson, Coffin; to Walnut Ridge 
(1837-60): Coffin, Clark, Pitts, Moore; to other Indiana 
meetings (1822- ): Coffin, Stafford, Johnson, Thomas, 
Pugh, Mendenhall, Hiatt, Cosand, Moore, Bundy, Fisher. 

Mount Pleasant Monthly Meeting. — To Westland 
(1802): Bradford; to Miami (1803-09): Hiatt, Pope, Pick- 
rell. Hosier, Suffring, Bailey, Williams, Jessop, Hill, Over- 
man, Small, Paxson, Bond, Ballard; to Concord (1805): 
Vimon, Davis, Bundy, Woods; to Fairfield (1807-19): 
Hiatt, Chalfant, Reece, Betts, Hunt, Green, Pearson, 
Newby, Stanley, Ballard, Jfessop, Robinson, Bond, Pig- 
gott, Perisho, McPherson, Hockett, Green, Bi-yant, Bently; 
to other Ohio meetings (1804-24): Thomas, Lundy, Bond, 
Ballard, Sumner, Beek, Pierce, Stalker, Scooly, Green, 
Gray, Williams, Robinson, Pierson, Wildman, Ward, John- 
son, Pike, Lewis, Car>', Hunt, Anthony, Hiatt, Betts, 
Bundy, Jones, Chew, Davis; to White Water (1810-12): 
Lundy, Thornbrough, Coffin, Bond, McLean, Potter, Davis, 
Farmer, Commons, Hoggatt; to Lick Creek (1814-21): 
Carter, Williams, Davis. 

Spring Monthly Meeting. — To Bloomfield, Park Co., 
Ind. (1831-39): Newlin, Lindley, Morison, Harvey, Sergent, 
Carl, Woody, Andrew, Hadley; to White Lick (1831-37): 
Lindley, Turner, Hadley, Thompson; to other Indiana 
meetings (1831-38): Piggott, Hadley (these records were 
seen for 1831-39 only). 

Piney Grove Monthly Meeting. — To Ohio meetings 
(1805-12): Stafford, Mendenhall, Beauchamp, Thomas, 
Marine, Moorman, Harris, Morris, Lingagar, Almond; to 
White Water (1812-15): Beauchamp, Thomas, Baldwin, 
Parker, Wilents, Knight, Moorman; to Lick Creek (181 5): 
Morris, Dauson, Thomas, Mendenhall. 

Bush River Monthly Meeting. — To Westland (1802- 
03): Pugh, Jay, Kelly, O'Neal, Mills, Peaty, Homer, 
Wright; to Miami (1803-07):' Evans, Cate, Compton, 

•Some of these certificates are addressed t^ Little Miami Monthly 
Meeting, but they were all evidently intended for Miami Monthly 



280 Southern Quakers and Slavery. 

Bridgers, Brooks, Jenkins, Davis, Coppock, Pearson, 
Gaunt, Nichols, Furnas, Ellyman, Coats, Teague, Kelly, 
Hollingsworth, Henderson, Cook, Jay, Comner, Jones, 
"IVIote, Wrigirt, Thomas, Cox, Insco, Farmer, Miles, Mc- 
Cool, Peaty, Vernon, Compton, Weisner, Mills, Stedom, 
Cammack, Cave, Benbow, Hasket, Thompson, McClure, 
Lewis, Brown, Bartin; ^o otJier Ohio viectings (1805- )• 
Galbreath, Marmaduke, Mendenhall. 

Wrightsborough Monthly Meeting (including some 
emigrants from Bush River and Cane Creek, S. C.)- — To 
Miami (1802-1810): Farmer, Maddox, Thomson, Hart, 
Mendenhall, Stubbs, Green; to other Ohio meetings: But- 
ler, Hollingsworth, Moore, Jay, Pearson, Killey, Hender- 
son, Williams, Brooks." 

No section in the West represents, perhaps, more dis- 
tinctly the effects of this Southern migration than does 
Wayne County, Indiana, and White Water Monthly Meet- 
ing, which is within its limits. This county is on the eastern 
border of the State and has Richmond for its county-seat 
One of its Carolina pioneers was David Hoover, of Ran- 
dolph County. N. C. The personal history of this man and 
of his family is typical of the hundred-year histor}^ of the 
Society of Friends which I here seek to present. " I was 
born," he says in his autobiography, " on a small water- 
course, called Huwarrie, a branch of the Yadkin River, in 
Randolph County, North Carolina, on the 14th day of 
April, 1 781." His opportunities for education were very 

Meeting, which is near the Little Miami River, AVarren County, O. 
It was the first monthly meeting set up in Western Ohio, and was 
established by Redstone Quarterly Meeting in October, 1803. 

' Were the means at hand it would be an exceedingly interesting 
study to find out how manj^ descendants of these Quakers who left 
the South because of slavery became prominent in service of the 
Union during the Civil War. Lucy Norman, the mother of Edwin 
M. Stanton, removed from Stevensburg, Culpeper County. Va.. to 
Ohio, with a Quaker family named Starr. The family of Senator 
George E. Pngh.of Ohio, went from South Carolina. Gen. Solo- 
mon Meredith was a Guilford County (N. C.) Quaker, and the father 
of George W. Julian, the Free-Soil candidate for Vice-president in 
1852, migrated from Randolph County, N. C. 



Settlement of the Middle West. 281 

limited; he had no chance to read a newspaper, and he never 
saw a bank-note until a man. "If my information is correct, 
my grandfather, Andrew Hoover, left Germany when a boy, 
married Margaret Fonts, in Pennsylvania, and settled on 
Pipe Creek, in Maryland. There my father was born, and 
from thence, now abovit one hundred years ago [c. 1754], he 
removed to North Carolina, then a new countr}^ He left 
eight sons and five daughters, all of whom had large families. 
Their descendants are mostly scattered through what we call 
the Western country. . . . My father had a family of ten 
children, four sons and six daughters. In order to better 
our circumstances he came to the conclusion of moving to 
a new countr}^ and sold his possessions accordingly. He 
was then worth rising of two thousand dollars, which at 
that time, and in that country, was considered very consid- 
erably over an average in point of wealth. On the 19th of 
September, 1802, we loaded our wagon and wended our way 
tow^ard that portion of what was then called the Northwest- 
ern Territor}' which constitutes the present State of Ohio. . . 
After about five weeks' journeying, we crossed the Ohio 
river at Cincinnati. . . . We pushed on to Stillwater, about 
twelve miles north of Dayton, in what is now the county of 
Montgomery. A number of our acquaintances had located 
themselves there the previous spring. There we encamped 
in the woods the first winter. . . . Our object was to find a 
suitable place for making a settlement and where but few or 
no entries had been made. But a small portion of the land 
lying west of the Great Miami, or east of the Little Miami, 
was settled at that time. We were hard to please. We 
Carolinians^ would scarcely look at the best land, where 
spring-water was lacking. . . . Thus time passed on until 
the spring of 1806, when myself and four others, rather 

'It is worthy of note that Friends are almost the only citizens of 
North Carolina who recognize that they have the right to this form 
of the name instead of those across the line. It is the rarest thing 
for Quakers to speak of themselves as "North Carolinians." They 
are nearly always simply "■ Carolinians." and in Quaker parlance 
" Carolina " still means the Old North State. 



282 Southern Quakers and Slavery. 

accidentally, took a section line some eight or ten miles 
north of Dayton, and traced it a distance of more than 
thirty miles, through an unbroken forest, to where I am now 
writing. It was the last of February, or first of March, when 
I first saw White Water. On my return to my father's I 
informed him that I thought I had found the country we 
had been in search of. Spring-water, timber and building 
rock appeared to be abundant,' and the face of the country 
looked delightful. In about three weeks after this, my 
father, with several others, accompanied me to this ' land of 
promise.' As a militar}' man W'Ould say, we made a recon- 
noissance. ... It was not until the last of May or the first 
of June that the first entries were made. John Smith [from 
Perquimans Count}-, N. C] then entered south of Main 
Street, where Richmond now stands, and several other tracts. 
My father entered the land upon which I now live, I having 
selected it on my first trip, and several other quarter-sections. 
About harvest of this same year, Jeremiah Cox reached here 
from good old North Carolina [Randolph 'County] and pur- 
chased where the north part of Richmond now stands. If I 
mistake not, it had been previously entered by John Meek, 
the father of Jesse Meek, and had been transferred to Joseph 
Woodkirk, of whom J. Cox made the purchase. Said Cox 
also entered several other tracts. Jeremiah Cox, John 
Smith, and my father were then looked upon as rather 
leaders in the Society of Friends. Their location here had 
a tendency of drawing others, and soon caused a great rush 
to White Water, and land that I thought would hardly ever 
be settled was rapidly taken up and improved. Had I a 
little more vanity I might almost claim the credit ... of 
having been the pioneer of the great body of Friends now'to 
be found in this region, as I think it very doubtful whether 
three Yearly Meetings would convene in this county, had 
T not traced the line before-mentioned." ^ 



'These are the chief characteristics of his old home section in 
Nortli Carolina. 

'•' Mcmuiv of David Hoover, written by himself and edited by Isaac 
TI. Julian. 



Settlement of the Middle West. 283 

Hoover had been preceded in 1805 by John Endsley, who 
came from South CaroHna. He traveled between South 
Carolina and Wayne County, Ind., seven times, five of the 
trips being made on horseback. Other North Carolina 
Friends soon followed Hoover. Elijah Wright, Benjamin 
Hill, Robert Hill and David Railsback came in 1806 or 
1807; Ralph Wright, Charles Hunt, Isaac Beeson, Benjamin 
Maudlin, in 1807; Jesse Bond settled in 1808 on a farm 
where Earlham College now is; John Burgess and Isaac 
Julian (father of George W. Julian) came in 1808, the latter 
from Randolph County. There were also a few emigrants 
into the section from South Carolina and Virginia. Many 
North Carolina Quaker names became common in the 
county, such as Anderson, Bunker, Beeson, Beard, Bogue, 
Clark, Elliott, Fonts, Hubbard, Hiatt, Harris, Hough, 
Henly, Jessop, Johnson, Jordan, Morris, Mendenhall, 
Newby, Nicholson, Nixon, Overman, Peele, Pike, Starbuck, 
Swain, Symons, Vestal, White, Wilson, Williams. 

Many of these came from Guilford and Randolph coun- 
ties. Center and New Garden townships were laid out in the 
new county, and the names of the North Carolina localities 
from which the immigrants came were soon stereotyped, 
such as " Guilford County, near Clemmons's store," or 
" Beard's hat shop," or " Deep River settlement of Friends," 
or " Dobson's cross roads." ^ 

In the same way the first settlers of Henry County, In- 
diana, another Quaker stronghold, came from Maryland, 
Virginia, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Ohio and Ken- 
tucky, beginning about 1819. The biographical history of 
the pioneers of Henry County indicates that a majority were 
bom in Virginia and North Carolina.^ 

These records illustrate the character and extent of the 
migrations from North Carolina. In point of territory, the 
western Yearly Meetings, beginning with Ohio, were set 

^History of Wayne Counfy. Indiana. 1884 ; Andrew W. Young's 
History of Wayne County. Indiana. 1872. 
^History of Henry County, Indiana, 1884. 



284 Southern Quakers and Slavery. 

off from Baltimore Yearly Aleeting, but the parent meeting, 
in reality, is North Carolina Yearly Meeting, as Stanley 
Pumphrey recognizes in his journal. He says: "I believe 
that fully half the Friends in the West are of Carolina de- 
scent, and many of the most prominent men, like Charles 
F. Coffin, Dr. Dougan Clark and Dr. William Nicholson, 
are natives of Carolina." 

This view of the case agrees literally with what was written 
me recently by Addison Coffin, a man of close observation 
and inquiring mind, an actor in the migration, and one who 
has investigated the subject for himself. He writes under 
date of January i6, 1894: "Two or three years ago the 
Historical Society of Wayne and Henry County, Indiana, 
asked me to assist them in getting a list of family names 
known to have emigrated from North Carolina to Indiana 
in the first half of this century. I succeeded in furnishing 
over three hundred; in many instances twenty or more fam- 
ilies of one name migrated; my list began moving in 1806, 
when there was quite a large number left the State; again, 
frcm 1818 to 1819. After the agitation and settling of the 
Missouri Compromise, thousands left the State, a very 
large per cent being Quakers; again, as a result of the 
South Carolina nullification frolic other thousands left; 
then when the legislature disfranchised the free colored 
men,' and forbade masters from educating their slaves,' the 
tide of emigration increased and flowed without ceasing till 
the rebellion." Mr. Coffin estimates that in 1850 one-third 
of the population of the State of Indiana was composed of 
native Carolinians and their children in the first generation. 

These emigrants were not all Friends, for there were 
many other enemies of slavery in the South. There were 
among them many of the middle class (~»f the white popula- 
tion who did not own slaves, who could not come into eco- 
nomic competition with slave labor, who realized that their 
own labor was degraded by the presence of slaves, and who 



' By the revision of the State ConBtitution in 1835. 
-Law of 1830-31. 



Settlement of the Middle West. 285 

sought to escape its influence by removal. These are they 
who were called by negro slaves in the South and by some 
historians " poor white trash " ; by the negroes from con- 
tempt because they owned few or no slaves; by the his- 
torians from ignorance, and the latter have also represented 
that they were not lovers of liberty. Whatever the origin of 
the word, there is the clearest evidence that it was used be- 
fore the war by the slaves alone. It perhaps started with 
house servants in the more aristocratic families, for these 
servants were the greatest aristocrats in all the South. So 
far as my observation goes, and that of my correspondents 
in various parts of the country, the term originated with and 
was used almost exclusively by the negroes. 

There certainly would have been the greatest inconsist- 
ency in the use of the term by well-to-do slaveholders, for 
many of them had risen by their own energy and pluck from 
the ranks of this same class to independence and af^uence. 
Nothing can be more unjust than to speak of " poor whites " 
as a class without energy, character or ambition. Such is 
not the case. They are men who have always had a fierce, 
even an unreasoning, love of liberty. They are the repre- 
sentatives of the men who stood behind the English barons 
at Runnymede; they plucked victory from the French at 
Crecy, Poictiers and Agincourt. They are the men who 
braved the heat of the day in the Revolution. They fur- 
nished the bone and sinew of both armies in the American 
conflict. Their typical representatives are Jackson, John- 
son and Lincoln. These were the men who left Virginia, the 
Carolinas and Georgia by thousands, because there was no 
liberty with slavery. These are the men — many Quakers, 
many not — who contributed with their brain and their brawn 
to the making of the central West. 



CHAPTER XL 
The Decline of Southern Quakerism. 

We have now come to the turn in the tide for Southern 
Quakerism. From the beginning of the nineteenth century 
the decHne of the Society is visible. It has disappeared 
entirely from South Carolina and Georgia. It has become 
very weak in Virginia. It has disappeared also from certain 
parts of North Carolina. There are now no Quakers in 
Pasquotank County, where there w-ere three meetings in 
1800 and one meeting- in 1850. Craven, Carteret and Jones 
counties reported four meetings in 1800 and one in 1850. 
There are none to-day. It has disappeared from the Cape 
Fear section. Its members have become fewer in number 
in Perquimans and Northampton. We can also trace a 
movement westward even within the limits of the State. 
There has been an efifort to get away from the sea-coast, 
probably for the same reason as the westward migration, 
for the slaves were more numerous in the eastern counties. 
It has grown in Johnston, Wayne, Guilford and Randolph 
counties, the last two being now the banner Quaker counties 
of the State. Guilford now contains twenty per cent and 
Randolph twenty-two per cent of their total population in the 
State. 

In Virginia, Quakerism is strongest in the counties of 
Frederick, Loudoun and Fairfax, where a majority have 
accepted the Hicksite view. It has disappeared from Surry, 
Prince George, Charles City, Hanover, Louisa, Bedford and 
Campbell. There are three meetings in Southampton, one 
in Nansemond and one in Henrico. With the beginning 
of the present century there is a visible change in the tone 
of the Virginia minutes. The invariable answer to the sec- 
ond of the annual questions is, " no new meeting-houses 



The Decline of Southern Quakerism. 287 

built or meetings settled." Then it becomes necessary for 
Friends to appoint committees to look into the condition of 
certain meetings. In 1807 the meeting at Black Creek 
in New Kent County was suspended, and Friends were 
appointed to sell the meeting-house and the lot on which it 
was located. In 1809 I find that " the committee continued 
to sell Black Creek meeting-house reported that no person 
had yet offered to purchase it — ^the committee is discon- 
tinued and the house given to Friends in that neighborhood 
to pull down or otherwise apply to their private benefit." ^ 
Black Water Monthly Meeting was laid down in 1806; Ben- 
nett's Creek meeting was laid down in 1821. A new meet- 
ing was established in Prince George County in that year 
by the name of Binford, but this turn was only temporar}^ 
and it w^as laid down in 1826. Seacock meeting was laid 
down in 1821; Stanton's in 1829, when there were only two 
families there, and Burleigh in 1832. These four composed 
a part of Gravelly Run ]\lonthly Meeting, told on its organi- 
zation and it too was laid down in 1832. These were not 
isolated cases of decay. Fothergill tells us that Friends 
had almost disappeared from the Eastern Shore of Virginia 
as early as 1736. About 1750 the Chuckatuck meeting was 
reduced to a faithful few. But their time was not yet. In 
1814 the Goose Creek Monthly Meeting, which dates from 
1794 in the prosperous years of the Society, was laid down 
and its few remaining members turned over to South River 
Monthly Meeting. In 181 7 the Western Quarterly Meeting, 
whose organization in 1797 indicated the direction in which 
Quaker migration was going, was also laid do^vn, for the 
wave had passed its limits, surmounted the AUeghanies, sub- 
dued the wilderness, and spread itself into the valley of the 
Mississippi. 

The Hicksite Separation. 

In the meantime the Hicksite controversy had culminated 
in 1828. It is not within the province of this paper to enter 

'A meeting of the same name still exists in Southampton County. 



288 Southern Quakers and Slavery. 

into a detail of events leading up to this movement which 
had a very unfortunate influence on the Society. It arose 
from a difference in theological beliefs, and each party 
claimed to represent the original views of Fox and his fol- 
lowers. The separation began in Philadelphia Yearly Meet- 
ing, and extended to those of New York, Ohio, Indiana and 
Baltimore. It did not extend to the Virginia or North 
Carolina Yearly Meetings. It is only with the separation 
in Baltimore Yearly Meeting that we are concerned. The 
orthodox party lost all of their meetings within the bounds 
of this Yearly Meeting that were located in Virginia, except 
a part of the meeting at Hopewell, and the meeting-house 
at this place has been used jointly by the two branches up 
to the present time. In 1832 an almanac of the Hicksite* 
Friends reported ten meeting-houses as then in use by them- 
selves in Northern Virginia. In Hopewell Monthly !\Ieet- 
ing were Hopewell, Centre, Berkeley, Middle Creek, Thft 
Ridge, and Dillon's Run; Fairfax made a monthly meetincr 
by itself; Goose Creek Alonthly Meeting had Goose Creek 
and South Fork; Alexandria Monthly Meeting had Alex- 
andria meeting, with Washington on the other side of the 
river. In recent years there has been a greater relative 
growth of the orthodox branch in this section. The census 
of 1890 put the number of orthodox Friends at ninet}'-six 
and the number of Hicksite Friends at five hundred and six. 
One of the best known members of the latter party was 
Edward Stabler, who was one of the most prominent of 
Virginia Friends. His father removed from York, England, 
to Pennsylvania, then settled in Petersburg, Va., and there 
the son was boni on Septcniber 18. 1769. The son learned 
the business of tanning. l)ut went into the drug business, 
first in Leesburg, Va., and in 1701 in Alexandria, Va. He 



' As all persons acquaiDted with the history of Friends are aware, 
this name is not recognized by this brancli of tiie Society. The 
terms Hicksite and ortliodox :tre used here as in popular parlance, 
to distinguish the two. It is not the province of this paper to 
discuss the question as to which branch is nearer the teachings of 
Fox. 



The Decline of Southern Quakerism. 289 

became a prominent leader in the Society. He visited the 
more southern meetings in 1804, and in 1806 began to 
preach. From this time on he was largely engaged in the 
work of the ministry, particularly in the Northern, Eastern 
and Middle States, and was very useful in helping to sup- 
press the improper use of spirituous liquors among Friends. 
He died in Alexandria, January 18, 1831. His life has been 
published by his son. 

Besides Samuel M. Janney, of whom a sketch has been 
given in another connection, this branch of the Society had 
another prominent representative in this section in Ben- 
jamin Hollowell. He was not a native, but spent much 
time in Alexandria and in Washington City, where he was 
well and favorably known from his connection with educa- 
tional work and for his scientific publications. Between 
1824 and 1858 he conducted the Alexandria (Va.) Boarding 
School, and numbered among his pupils many sons of slave- 
holders, including Gen. Robert E. Lee and Gen. Edmund 
Kirby-Smith. His autobiography has been published.^ 

T/ie Layijig Doivn of Virginia Yearly Meeting. 

Although, as has been said already, the separation did 
not extend to the Virginia or to the North Carolina Yearly 
Meetings, it is safe to say that its influence on those meetings 
was bad. In the meantime the Virginia Yearly Meeting was 
growing weaker year by year. In 1829 they write their 
North Carolina brethren that their meeting is small and 
continues to annually decrease on account of the migration 
of Friends to other States, where slavery does not exist, 
and " from the departure of many of our youth from the 
Testimonies and simplicity of our ancestors," and Thomas 
Shillitoe says there were only two acknowledged ministers 
within the Yearly Meeting at that time. In 1830 they invite 
Baltimore and North Carolina Yearly Meetings to send 

'See the valuable paper on "Education in the Religious Society 
of Friends," by Edward H. Maojill, LL. D., in Proceedings of the 
Religious Congress for Friends [Chicago, 1893]. 8°. 



290 Southern Quakers and Slavery. 

delegates to sit with theni aiid confer with their committse 
on the advisabihty of laying down the Yearly Meeting, a 
step which, they say, had hitherto never been known. The 
committee reported that time for dissolution had not yet 
come, but in consideration of their weak state Baltimore 
and North Carolina were invited " to extend their christian 
regard toward this meeting." The committees were again 
present in 1832 and made the same report, also in 1833, but 
the time was not yet. In 1834 the Yearly Meeting was 
transferred from Gravelly Run, where it had been held for 
many }'ears alternately with Cedar Creek, to Somerton in 
Nansemond County. There was a poetic fitness in this 
change; it was as if the old man, weary of the troubles and 
trials of life, had come home to die, for Nansemond had 
been the scene of their early trials and triumphs. Here Fox 
and Edmundson had labored and here some of their earliest 
meetings were held. The Yearly Meeting dragged on for 
a few years longer. In 1843 committees from the Yearly 
Meetings of Philadelphia, Baltimore, and North Carolina 
met \'^irginia Friends to advise on the situation. The last 
Yearly Meeting was convened at Somerton in the 5th 
month, 1844. The Virginia Yearly and Quarterly Meet- 
ings were then suspended and Friends were constituted 
a Half Yearly ^Meeting with the powers of a quarterly meet- 
ing, which now meets alternately at Black Creek, South- 
ampton County, and in Richmond. It reports to Baltimore 
Yearly ^feeting. 

Thus, after an inde])en(lcnt organization of nearly a hun- 
dred and fifty years, the Virginia Yearly Meeting ceased to 
exist as a separate body. It had seen the colony of Virginia 
grow from a feeble folk, oppressed with political bondage 
and religious bigotry, into a great and flourishing common- 
wealth cherishing civil and religious liberty as the corner- 
stones of its system. But they saw one cancerous spot in 
its social system ; they had rid themselves and had sought 
to rid the State of this incubus; they had failed; slavery 
proved too powerful for Friends; they left the mother-State 
t(j her fate. 



The Decline of Southern Quakerism. 291 

Causes of the Decline of Southern Quakerism. 

This brings us directly to enumerate and discuss very 
briefly the causes which have led to the decHne of Southern 
Quakerism. 

I. The removal of Friends to the West. This removal 
uas itself the result of at least three causes. The Quakers 
were Teutons. The old love of adventure was strong in 
their breasts as it was in the breasts of those who did not 
accept their religious views. The influence of this spirit 
in extending the area of their settlements is acknowledged 
by John Churchman, John Griffith and other traveling min- 
isters. It was the same spirit that had led to the discovery 
and settlement of America. It was an historic force. These 
Quakers, all unconsciously, were carrying out the spirit of 
their race. It was the same as the spirit which took the Angles 
and Saxons to Britain; which drove the Franks and later 
the Normans into Gaul; led the Ostrogoths into Italy, the 
Visigoths into Spain, and the Vandals to Africa. This was 
the first heart-beat, as von Ranke calls it. The second heart- 
beat leads the descendants of these same Teutons to the Holy 
Land on the Crusades ; when their day was over the struggle 
was kept up in Spain against the Moors; and the discovery 
of America was one of the results of the fall of Grenada. 
(2) Along with this historic spirit went the economic spirit 
— a search for more land and better land than was then 
available in the older States, for the best lands had been 
exhausted by continuous crops, and fertilizers were not 
extensively used. To show that these two reasons would 
have led many to emigrate it is only necessar}' for us to 
study the development of Old England, or New England, or 
the Aliddle Colonies, or the Germany of to-day. (3) It may 
be an open question as to how many of these particular 
emigrants would have gone West had there been no slavery 
in the South. But that slavery did have an overwhelming 
influence in the case under discussion no one can deny. 

II. Dissensions within the Societv. As we have seen, the 



292 Southern Quakers and Slavery. 

Hicksite schism divided and therefore weakened the Society 
in Northern Virginia. 

III. Disovvnments for slight offenses, Hke marr\'ing out 
of Society, and persistent efforts to force all men into the 
same narrow mould, which is so visible in the earlier records 
of the Society, have both cost it dear. 

IV. Two elements have prevented the growth of the 
Society. On the one hand, its extreme spirituality has been 
a load on the Society. No body of Christians has come so 
near fulfilling, perhaps, the injunction to worship in spirit 
and in truth as have Friends. This deep spirituality is too 
high for most men. Their deficiencies must be supplied 
by forms and ceremonies. On the other hand, Quakers 
were the radicals of the Reformation. They abominated 
above all things the forms, ceremonies and rituals of the 
Rcm.an Church; they were equally as uncompromising 
with those of the English Church. But in their very effort 
to escape from the Scylla of ritualism they fell into the 
Charybdis of stiffness and inflexibility. They developed 
forms and ceremonies of their own which were no less 
ritualistic than those of the Roman Church, and w^hich were 
adhered to with such tenacity that the expression " rigid as 
a Quaker " became a by-word in the English-speaking 
world. To have no forms, no rites, no symbols, no liturgies 
is the root of Quaker forms. Their entire history is full 
of the adoption of external signs as the witness of the min- 
istry of the spirit. Wearing sackcloth on the body and 
ashes on the head, as was sometimes done in early times, 
and a difference in dress, tell the very same story as the alb 
and cassock of the priest The use of the thee and thou, the 
broad-brim hat, the cun^ed coat, the sing-song tone of ad- 
dress, the wearing of hats in court, disownment of those 
who marry outside of Society, all point to the same effort 
to indicate a coming out from the world.' These things, 

' It is but just for ur to Bay. in answer to a part of these criticisms, 
that more thiiif^s were worn for mere fashion in the seventeenth 
century than now. It was against these excesses that the Quaker 



The Decline of Southern Quakerism. 293 

so utterly insignificant by the side of the deep spirituaUty for 
which the Society has always stood, have been abandoned 
to a large extent. Quakers are not now generally known 
by their speech or their dress; but this was not the case 
until recent years, and the outsider, when first coming in 
contact with them, experienced, in many cases, a vague 
feeling of dread, and this feeling has repelled many who 
might have been attracted by their spiritualit}^ and by their 
strong insistence on moral character. 

V. Aggressiveness of other denominations. The most 
careless perusal of the journals of the traveling Friends 
from the time of the Revolution will convince the reader 
that Friends were being absorbed, as it were, slowly and 
imperceptibly, into the greater body of their more aggres- 
sive and vigorous rivals, the Methodists and Baptists. The 
journalists note frequently that their congregations are made 
up principally of outsiders; when denominations are given 
they are almost always Methodists and Baptists. These 
attended their meetings, entertained their preachers and 
absorbed their members. The completeness of this can be 
seen clearly in the journal of Samuel M. Janney, who notes 
the fact that there had been Friends in Culpeper, Orange 
and Albemarle counties, Virginia, in the closing years of 
the eighteenth century; but in 1841-42 they had disappeared. 
The Methodists had taken their place. 

It is true to say that Quakerism was absorbed in Vir- 
ginia and North Carolina to a great extent by the Methodists. 
But it would be far from the truth to think that Quakerism 
thus disappeared leaving no trace behind. The influence 
which it has exerted on Southern Methodism has been 
very profound. It is probably accurate to call the Methodist 
Church the heir of the Quakers. Indeed it is entirely 
within the bounds of historical accuracy to say that the 

protested ; that his garb has become peculiar, in part, because he 
has not chosen to change with the seasons ; that his style is tending 
to become the fashion again. The student will recall what a near 
approach was made to the coat of the Quaker in the coats that were 
the fashion in the spring of 1894. 



294 Southern Quakers and Slavery. 

foundations of ?^Iethodism in Virginia and North Carolina 
were laid by Edmundson and Fox rather than by Whitefield 
and Robert Williams. The beginnings of Methodism are 
much nearer 1672 than 1772. [Methodism was a return 
toward the forms of primitive Quakerism. With them, as 
with the Methodists a centurv^ later, religion took the form 
of excessive emotion. The convicted sinner shook from 
head to foot: there were many groans and sighs and tears; 
then a sudden change, with a " sweet sound of thanksgiving 
and praise." ' In other words, the Quakerism of the Revo- 
lutionar}^ period was beginning to lose that aggressive and 
exuberant vitality that characterized it at the time of the 
death of Fox. It was sinking into that quietism which had 
characterized English Friends since the beginning of the 
eighteenth centur}'. The continued enthusiasm of American 
Friends explains why the system retained its aggressive 
vitalit}' and grew ia numbers for almost a centun- after 
English Quakers had reached their maximum in numbers. 
When this spirit disappeared American Quakerism began 
to lose numbers relatively. The early Methodists were sim- 
ply leading their Quaker hearers back to the good old days 
of the past. 

The relations between Southern Quakers and Southern 
Methodists have usually been very cordial." Quakers 
seldom abandon outright the scenes of former habitations. 
They have returned to thcni in after years, have ^'ound few 
of their own members still alive, but have received a warm 
welcome at the hands of Methodists and others. Thus, 
although their last meeting in Pasquotank County, N. C. 
was laid down in 1854, they continued to visit and to 
preach among the Methodists there for nearly a generation.' 

'Samuel Fothergill. Easaii on the Socictii of Friends. 

*Thufi the Quakers of Carver's Creek Monthlj' ]\Ieeting gave their 
meetiug liouHC to the Methodists wlio were then coining into that 
Bection of North Carolina. Tlie hitter now liave a cluirch on tlie 
site of the Quaker meeting-liouse, and tliis is one of tlie strongest con- 
gregations in the county. — Private information from C. M. McLean, 
Esq., Eiizabethtowu, N. C. ^Personal recoUectious. 



The Decline of Southern Quakerifim. 295 

In the same way Friends left Carteret County, N. C, for 
the West, 1830-40, and regular services were suspended 
then, but Friends visited the section until their own meeting- 
house had perished from decay. They then held meetings 
in private houses or in the Methodist church, which was 
always open to them . A touching "story is told of the three 
or four Quaker families who still lived in the section. 
One took up his residence in the meeting-house until he 
could erect a dwelling, and as long as the meeting-house 
stood this man and the two or three other families met 
regularly on Wednesdays and Sundays for silent worship. 

T/ie Nortli Carolina Yearly Meeting since 1844. 

It follows then that from the time of the laying down of 
the Virginia Yearly ?ileeting in 1844 vmtil the present there 
has been but one Yearly Meeting within the bounds treated 
in this volume. This is the North Carolina Yearly Meeting, 
covering North Carolina and Tennessee, for as early as 
1826 all reference to South Carolin? and Georgia as com- 
prising a part of the Yearly Meeting had been dropped. 
The history of Southern Quakerism since 1844 is little more 
than the history of the Society in those two States. 

This Yearly Meeting has been particularly free from 
internal dissensions ; neither the early controversy with John 
Perrot nor the later schisms of the New Lights or Ranters; 
nor Hicks; nor such a division on the question of slavery 
as occurred in Indiana in 1843, ^^^^ ^ver occurred within it. 
It has perhaps had less internal disorder than any other 
Yearly Meeting in America. While others were torn and 
weakened by internal strife, this went on in its work quietly 
and undisturbed. This immunity from divisions has helped 
it to show that wonderful vitality on which I have already 
remarked, and to maintain its absolute if not relative 
strength. 

The majority of Friends both in Virginia and North 
Carolina accepted the views advanced by Joseph John 



296 A^outhcrn Quakers and Slavery. 

Gurney during his visit to America, 1837-40. He was in 
North CaroHna and Virginia in 1837 and in Georgia and 
South CaroHna in 1840. The " Beacon " controversy in 
England was an outgrowth of Gurney's views. He advo- 
cated the Bible as " the only divinely appointed means and 
rule of salvation." His opponents claimed that he not only 
tended toward the Episcopacy, but some even said he was 
an Episcopalian.' In England the " Beacon " controversy 
gave rise to what were known as " Evangelical Friends." 
In America the split began in New England and extended 
to other meetings. The Society was divided in New Eng- 
land into a larger body who followed Gurney, and a 
smaller body. Indiana and North Carolina Yearly Meetings 
were great admirers of Gumey; and his character, as seen 
from his memoirs, seems to have been thoroughly lovable. 
In 1849, Baltimore, North Carolina and Indiana Yearly 
Meetings recognized the larger or Gurneyite body in New 
England, and these, with New York Yearly Meeting, caused 
a joint conference to assemble in Baltimore, whose object 
was to secure recognition of the " Larger Body " of New 
England Friends by Philadelphia and Ohio Yearly Meet- 
ings and thus restore harmony and unity. There was 
another meeting in 1851, which issued an address, and one 
in 1853; in 1852 deputations from Baltimore and North 
Carolina attended Philadelphia and Ohio Yearly Meetings. 
But all these efforts failed. The trouble culminated in a 
separation in Ohio in 1854, in which the larger body, as in 
New England, accepted the views of Gurney, while the 
smaller body rejected these views.° The latter, from the 

' Philadelphia Yearly Meeting disclaimed officially the views of 
J. J. Gurney, and adopted in April, 1847, An Appeal for the 
Ancient Doctrines (Pliila., 1883, 8°). This appeal was also adopted 
by Ohio Yearly Meeting. 

*!See Hodgson's The Society of Friends in the Nineteenth Centnri/. 
This book is written from the extreme con.servative standpoint. 
For Gurney's views see the Declaration of Faith attached to his 
MevioiiN, II., also II., 109-115, 219-221. For the action of Baltimore 
and North Carolina Yearly Meetings see Baltimore ^linutes. 1845-55, 
N. C. Y. M. Minutes, 1849-53, and the J)ocumcnt giving the address 



The Decline of Southern Quakerism. 297 

name of their leader in New England, have since been dis- 
tinguished from the other party by the title of Wilburites. 

This trouble will also help to explain a tendency which is 
now visible among some members of the meetings in eastern 
North Carolina, particularly among those of Rich Square. 
Gurney did not stay among these meetings long, and his 
influence seems to have been small. They have had but 
little infusion of new blood, and are, therefore, more con- 
servative than the western meetings. They resist the 
attempt to introduce modem methods, and there is a desire 
apparent to separate these meetings from the North Carolina 
Yearly Meeting and to join them to Philadelphia Yearly 
Meeting. 

With the exception of these troubles, the Society in 
North Carolina has little history to record up to the Civil 
War. Those men were then coming on the scene in whose 
hands the Society has been until the present. The organi- 
zation moved on qviietly, and there is little in its records out 
of the ordinary. The main questions discussed were schools 
and the use of spirituous liquors. Now and then the ques- 
tion of slavery comes up, but seldom; they did not see their 
way in 1846 to make an order against voting for slave- 
holders, nor was it thought expedient in 1852 to take action 
on the question whether Friends should use slave products 
or not; one Friend is reported as holding slaves and others 
hired slaves ; but the days of the slaveiy agitation were over. 
There was found to be but one effective protest against 
the system — migration. 

of the committee in 1849. (New York. 1850.) See also Some Ac- 
count of the Late Separation in Ohio Yearly Meeting, which favors 
the Gurney party (Wheeling, 1855). and the Narrative of the seces- 
sion in New England "Larger Body," or Gurney party (Provi- 
dence. 1845). An examination of the causes of the separation in 
New England was made by the meeting for sufferings of Phila- 
delphia Yearly Meeting, followed by an expostulation to both 
bodies to review and retrace their steps, at the same time allowing 
the rights of membership, so far as Philadelphia Yearly Meeting 
was concerned, to both bodies. A copy of this examination was 
sent in MS. to each body. The Smaller Body published it. 



298 Southrni Qiialrf-.s and Slavery. 

A newer question and one which is still vital to the 
Society, was the use of intoxicating liquors. Each year the 
number of all members was reported and their position on 
this subject was given. These rei^rts enable us to give 
the numbers of the Society who were over eighteen years 
of age. In 1847, one thousand six hundred and thirty-six 
members are reported and two hundred and forty-five used 
intoxicants; in 1848, two thousand and twenty-four are 
reported: in 1849, two thousand and fifty-six. In 1850 
there were one thousand nine hundred and forty-six mem- 
bers divided among the quarters as follows: Eastern, two 
hundred and eighty-eight; \\'estern, three hundred and 
fort}-; New Garden, one hundred and ninety -three; Con- 
tentnea, fifty-four; Lost Creek, two hundred and thirty-six; 
Deep River, four , hundred and fourteen ; Southern, four 
hundred and twenty-one. In 185 1 there were two thousand 
and six members; in 1852, one thousand seven hundred and 
twenty -five and over; 1853, one thousand seven hundred and 
seventy-four; 1854, one thousand seven hundred and fifty; 
1855, one thousand seven hundred and eighty-one; 1856, 
one thousand six hundred and seventy-nine; 1857, one 
thousand five hundred and seventy-eight; 1858, one thou- 
sand seven hundred and eight; 1859, one thousand six hun- 
dred and two; i86o,one thousand five hundred and thirteen. 
From this time the number falls ofif rapidly, perhaps in part 
from emigration caused by the war and in part by the lack 
of more perfect statistics. In 1861 there were one thousand 
four hundred and sixty-one; 1862, one thousand and sev- 
enty-two; in 1863 the number reached its lowest point, one 
thousand and thirty; in 1864 it had gone up to one thousand 
six hundred and seventy-four, representing seven hundred 
and eighty-seven families and parts of families; in 1865 it 
was one thousand seven hundred and ninety-six. 

But the matters of most interest to us are those dealing 
with the intellectual life. The first and least successful of 
these was an effort in both X'irginia and North Carolina 
toward the establishment of monthly meeting libraries. 
Tlic weakness of the \'irginia meetings jirobably prevented 



The Decline of Southern Quakerism. 299 

any important action on the subject, but in 1838 the Yearly 
Meeting provided that the interest oh the fund which l^ad 
been given to the Society by Ann Scott, after paying the 
expenses of the sessions of the Yearly Meeting, should be 
devoted to the purchase of books. Within the North Caro- 
lina Yearly Meeting the question was first agitated in 1829, 
and we find that " the Meeting for Sufferings being brought 
under exercise on account of the great want there is within 
the limits of this Yearly Meeting of books of information 
on the principles and doctrines of the Society of Friends, 
propose a plan by which each of the monthly meetings, 
within our borders, may be supplied with a suitable library 
of books." As a result of this conference a committee was 
appointed to correspond with the meeting for sufferings in 
regard to the character of books and terms; such as had 
suitable books were requested to donate them to the libra- 
ries, and those who had no books to give were requested to 
subscribe liberally to the book fund; each monthly meeting 
was to send to the meeting for sufiferings a list of the books 
it had, a list of those it wanted, and to make an anrual 
report to the same; the meeting for sufferings was to super- 
vise the purchase and to send to the monthly meetings lists 
of suitable books. 

There was another general effort for libraries in 1836; 
in that year £60 was received from England for books; but 
these efforts, worthy as they were, seem to have met with 
little encouragement. There was, however, at least one 
exception to this fortune. Levi Coffin ^ tells us of his efforts 
in this direction in connection with a school he taught at 
Deep River: " In the early part of 1826 we organized a 
library association at my school-house, calling it the Naze- 
reth Library Association. We got several of the prominent 
men of the neighborhood interested in this work, and suc- 
ceeded in getting a small, yet good collection of books 
with which to start our library. We then made up a consid- 
erable sum of money, and having, by the aid of Jeremiah 

^Reminiscences, 105. 



300 Southern Quakers and Slavery. 

Hubbard and others, made out a list of valuable books, we 
sent by Abel Coffin, who was g'oing to Philadelphia, and 
purchased others. This was the beginning of what grew in 
time to be a large and interesting library. When my school 
closed, I made a donation of my stock and interest in the 
librar}^ to the association." 

Closely associated with the movement for libraries comes 
a similar movement looking to better educational facilities. 
Up to this time there were no higher institutions of learning 
in the State that w^ere in any sense distinctively Quaker. 
Secondary institutions were also wanting among them, and 
their primary schools were generally poor. 

During the previous generation. Friends in North Caro- 
lina, engaged as they had been in their long-drawn and stub- 
bornly contested fight against slavery, had had little time to 
think of their own more immediate needs. But with the 
beginning of the fourth decade of the century the tide 
turned more sternly against the negro, and Friends then 
became more self-conscious. Thev seem to have been 
thoroughly aroused to their situation by a report to the 
Yearly Meeting in 1831 : " There is not a school in the limits 
of the Yearly ^Meeting that is under the care of a committee 
of either monthly or preparative meeting. The teachers of 
Friends' children are mostly not members of our Society 
and all the schools are in a mixed state." A committee was 
appointed to prepare an address on the subject of education 
to subordinate meetings. Jeremiah Hubbard, who already 
had a school at New Garden, w^as one of the prime movers 
in the question. Funds were collected from this country 
and England and a school was located at New Garden in 
Guilford County. It was chartered in 1833 and was called 
New Garden Boarding School. It was to be governed by 
a body of trustees chosen from each quarter; was co-educa- 
tional; took only boarders, and only the children of Friends.' 
But the last clauses were soon repealed. The number of 



' Nereus Mendenhall says Governor Morehead was reported to 
have founded the celebrated Edgeworth Seminary in Greensboro 
becauHC iiis children were not received at the Boarding School. 



The Decline of Southern Quakerism. 301 

students who were not Friends is very noticeable; it con- 
tinued large during the war, and in 1865 reached 70 per 
cent, for many men were glad to send their younger sons 
here to save them from conscription in the Southern armies. 
The first superintendents were Dougan and Asenath Clark/ 
It was opened August i, 1837, with 25 boys and 25 girls, 
and had been preceded in 1835 by Belvidere Academy in 
Perquimans County, which was under the care of the 
Eastern Quarter and is still in successful operation as an 
institution for secondary instruction. 

Reports were made annually to the Yearly Meeting from 
New Garden Boarding School. In 1845 the average num- 
ber of pupils for the year was thirty-four and one-half. 
In 1850 there had been ninety-four pupils in the school 
during the past year, of whom forty were not mem- 
bers of Society. There were one hundred the next year; 
one hundred and twenty-eight in 1853; one hundred and 
forty-three in 1854; one hundred and seventy-nine in 1855; 
one hundred and sixty-three in 1856, of whom eighty -two 
were not Quakers; one hundred and fifty-nine in 1857; one 
hundred and thirty-nine in 1858, of whom only sixty were 
Quakers. As the war period drew on, from sickness, the 
panic of 1857, and other causes, numbers declined. The 
institution had never paid expenses and there was a chronic 
complaint of lack of funds. Its accounts were carelessly 
kept, were unreliable, and the matter became so serious 
that it was necessary to appoint an agent to look into its 
affairs. In i860 a committee from Baltimore and Indiana 
Yearly Meetings was sent down to confer over the matter. 
The debt, which was placed at $27,245.52 in 1861, was all 
assumed by the Yearly Meeting, and this body set heroically 
to work to pay the whole. Some $15,000 was received from 

'Dougan Clark was born in Randolph County, N. C, October 3, 
1783. He was a Methodist preacher for three years, but became a 
minister of Friends in 1817. He visited Ohio and Indiana in 1822 
and Ohio again in 1828. In 1834 he visited Philadelphia. New 
England and Canada Yearly Meetings, and Great Britain and Ire- 
land in 1844. He was superintendent of New Garden Boarding 
School for six years and died August 23, 1855. His wife was a 
daughter of Nathan Hunt (q. v.). 



302 SoutJii rii (JudJcers and Slavery. 

other Yearly Meetings for this purpose, and in 1865 the debt 
was reported as finally settled. The school had been turned 
over in 1861 to Jonathan E. Cox to be conducted as a pri- 
vate enterprise; this was successfully accomplished and on 
a gold basis. With the return of peace Friends were ready 
to assume its management again \\ith a clean balance-sheet 
and with the promise of a still greater degree of usefulness 
than it had had in the past. 

This institution is the head of Quaker education in the 
South, but this is not all. It has had its legitimate influence 
on the grades below. In 1851 it is reported that there 
were then eight hundred and four Quaker children in North 
Carolina Yearly Meeting between five and sixteen, and three 
hundred and thirty-six between sixteen and twenty-one. Of 
this number one thousand one hundred and four were 
receiving some education, and one thousand and thirty-eight 
had received some education the year before. These chil- 
dren had been taught in one hundred and thirty schools. 
All of these were co-educational; sixteen were taught by 
female members of Society and twenty-eight by male mem- 
bers, while eighty-six had been taught by outsiders. In 
1853 there were but eight children over five who were not 
receiving an education. In 1855 there were one thousand 
and sixty children between five and twenty-one, and we have 
the pleasing information that " there are none over five 
years of age but who arc in the way of receiving some edu- 
cation." Sunday schools were also inaugurated during this 
period. No other religious denomination in these States 
can probably show an educational record covering as thor- 
oughly the whole body of its communicants as Friends. 
The good work of primary and secondary education went 
on till the dark days of the Civil War, often under tlie most 
trying circumstances, for William Evans tells us that he saw 
a log school-house in Lost Creek Quarter, Tennessee, about 
1840, that had no windows and no fireplace; the fire was 
built in the middle of the room and the smoke g(^t out as 
it could.' 

'Jo»r«aZ, 405-415. 



The Decline of Southern QtiaJferism. 303 

Friends in the Civil War. 

During the Civil War Friends suffered no little. This 
was natural. They were within the limits of the Confed- 
eracy; they refused to fight; they were known to have circu- 
lated abolition literature, and some of them had been pun- 
ished for the same; and while they steadily refused to join 
the Federal forces, their well-known views on the question 
of slaver}' made them, of necessity, unfriendly to the South, 
and the Society served as a refuge, to a limited extent, for 
men who wished to escape conscription. But North Caro- 
lina Friends did not refuse to pay the taxes levied by the 
State, " believing that upon the government rests the respon- 
sibility of how they expend this tribute or custom." Nor 
did they refuse to contribute to the needs of the sick and 
suffering soldiers. 

Friends within the compass of Hopewell Quarter in 
Northern Virginia were the greatest sufferers. They were 
within the territory contended for by both armies. Their 
m.eeting-houses were occupied by Federal and Confederate 
troops by turns; some were used as hospitals during ^he 
greater part of the war. They suffered also from requisi- 
tions. Sheridan's raid into the Valley of Virginia cost 
Friends of Goose Creek Monthly Meeting about $80,000 
and Fairfax Monthly Meeting about $23,000 in property 
burned and live stock driven off; but the value of the latter 
was at a later period refunded by the Federal Government.' 

Some of the young Friends in the North joined the Fed- 
eral armies. " In the South," to quote Stanley Pumphrey, 
" there were not the same motives for laying aside peace 
principles as prevailed in the North. The Friends were 
loyal to the Union, and with their pronounced anti-slavery 
views could look with no sympathy upon the founding of 
a new polity, of which the leaders avow^ed that slavery should 
be the corner-stone. Accordingly I did not hear of more 
than one member who was ever known to take active part 

^ Janney's Memoirs., 188-235. 



304 Southern Quakers and Slavery. 

in the Southern army." Janney says that a few famiUes in 
Hopewell Quarter " allowed their sympathies with the 
Southern people to lead them astray." ^ Quakers wathin 
the verg-e of the old \''irginia Yearly Meeting seem to have 
sympathized with the South more than those of any other 
section. This was natural, as they, because of their fewness 
in numbers, were more controlled by circumstances. But 
they maintained a position of absolute neutrality. After 
reading carefully the minutes of the Richmond meeting 
through the whole of the war period, I found nothing to 
indicate that they were so much as aware that a war was 
going on until November, 1864. when it is reported that by 
reason of the excitement caused by the attack of the Federal 
Army on Richmond some of their members had been unable 
to attend meetings. 

Stanley Pumphrey continues in his journal: " Considering 
how obnoxious their principles must have been to the Con- 
federate government, it is to their credit that they often 
showed so much disposition to be lenient towards Friends. 
In twelfth month, 1861, a few months after the outbreak 
of hostilities, an attempt was indeed made in the Carolina 
Legislature to pass an act by which every free male person 
above sixteen years of age, would have been required, under 
penalty of baaishment within a month, publicly to renounce 
allegiance to the United States, and also to promise to sup- 
port, 'maintain and defend the Independent Government of 
the Confederates." ' But the enactment of the proposed 
test oath was successfully opposed. In the course of his 
speech against the test Gov. Graham said: "This ordinance 
wholly disregards their [the Quakers'] peculiar belief, and 
converts every man of them into a warrior or an exile. 
True, they are allowed to affirm, but the affirmation is 
equivalent to the oath of the feudal vassal to his lord, to 
' defend him with life and limb and terrene honor.' . . . This 
ordinance, therefore, is nothing less thnr e of banish- 



' jVemorr.s, 189. * ^[em<)ries ol' Stanley Piiinplirey. 137-162. 



The Decline of Southern Quakerism. 305 

ment to them. . . . Upon the expulsion from among us of 
such a people, the civilized world would cry, shame!"' 

In July, 1862, a conscription act passed the Confederate 
Congress which ordered every man between eighteen and 
thirty-five into the army. The North Carolina Meeting for 
sufiferings had a called session and drew up memorials to 
the State Convention and to the Confederate Congress. 
The latter was presented by John Carter and Nereus Men- 
denhall. It was laid before the Senate by Hon. William T. 
Dortch and before the House by Hon. J. R. McLean. The 
committee continue: "We were treated with respect by 
every one with whom we conversed on the subject, and by 
some, with tenderness of feeling. We may particularly 
mention William B. Preston, of Virginia, chairman of the 
committee on military afifairs for the Senate, and William 
Porcher Miles, chairman of a similar committee for the 
House. On an interview with the former, he told us to 
make ourselves entirely easy on the subject; that the Senate 
committee, in acting upon it, were unanimously in favor of 
recommending an entire exemption. He said that some 
were for requiring us to furnish substitutes, but that he was 
well aware that we could not conscientiously do that, and 
that nothing but a clear and full exemption would meet 
our scruples. Miles, chairman of House committee, invited 
us to a hearing, in their room, before the committee at 
large, and took pains to arrange the sittings as much as 
possible to suit our convenience. We here had the very 
acceptable company and assistance of John B. Crenshaw, 
who labored faithfully in word and doctrine." 

They did not secure what they desired, however. Friends 
were exempted from military service by Congress only on 
the payment of $500 each into the public treasury. Strictly, 
to the Quakers this was no favor at all, for they were no 
more willing to pay the fine than to go into the army itself. 
In taking action on this proposed exemption the committee 

pj'See Speech of Governor Graham, delivered December 7, 1861, 
pp. 10, 11. Raleigh, 1862. 



306 8outhe7'n Quakers and Slavery. 

report: "While, in accordance with the advice issued by 
our last Yearly Meeting, ' we do pay all taxes imposed on 
us as citizens and property holders, in common with other 
citizens, remembering the injunction, tribute to whom 
tribute is due, custom to whom custom'; yet, we cannot 
conscientiously pay this specific tax, it being imposed upon 
us on account of our principles, being the price exacted of 
us for religious liberty." To this statement of principle 
they add: "Yet do we appreciate the good intentions of 
those members of Congress who had it in their hearts to 
do something for our relief; and we recommend that where 
parents, moved by sympathy, or young men themselves 
dreading the evils of a military camp, have availed them- 
selves of this law, that they be treated in a tender manner." ' 

It is reasonable to conclude from the tone of this report 
that those Friends who preferred to clear themselves by 
paying the requisite sum were not held to a strict account 
by the Society. But there were cases where Friends de- 
clined to pay the ransom, and to escape conscription were 
compelled to hide in the woods in caves, or " dug-outs," 
and were subject to no little hardship. There were also 
cases where Friends were drafted into the army and on their 
refusal to perform military duty were treated harshly, even 
cruelly, but it is probable that such instances were few in 
number. 

The class to suffer most were those who were convinced 
of Friends' principles after the beginning of the war. The 
Society was thus liable to become a refuge for men who 
were for any reason unwilling to fight, and the term " war 



'Some North Carolina Quakers who went fo Indiana to escape 
being conscripted into the Confederate Army found themselves 
drafted into the Federal Army, and had to pay an exemption fine 
to keep out of service. One of these was Albert W. Brown, of 
Nortliampton County. 

Hon. George W. Julian writes me, under date of September 18, 
1895, concerning the Indiana Quakers : •' Tlie large Itody of Quakers 
whose Yearly Meetings are held in Kichmoud not only have a good 
auti-siavery record, but a record for jiatriotism. I think it is con- 
ceded that in proportion to their number they had more soldiers in 
the war for the Union than any other religious denomination." 



The Decline of Southern Quakerism. 307 

Quaker " became a term of reproach. No provision had 
been made for them under the Confederate exemption 
act, and we have record of several cases of much suffering. 
It is but just to say, however, that the Society did not allow 
itself to become a refuge for men whom it thought to be 
insincere, and that many of these newly-convinced Friends 
remained faithful to the cause which they had espoused.* 

' See Pumphi"ey as above ; Sufferings of Friends, 1868, and an 
interesting article on The Cave Dwellers of the Confederacy {Atlantic 
Monthly, October, 1891), by David Dodge (O. W. Blacknall). The 
fortune of Southern Quakers has been treated exhaustively by 
Fernando G. Cartland in his Southern Hemes or the Friends in 
War Time (Cambridge, 1895), 8°, pp. 480, veith portraits; and in 
novel form by Lydia C. Wood in The Haydock's Testimony (Phila- 
delphia, 1890). 

Additional Note on Emigration from South Carolina and 
Georgia. 

Since Chapter X. was put into type I have seen a copy of the 
second edition of O'Neall's Annals of Newberry (Nev^berry, S. C, 
1892). The original work of Judge O'Neall is reprinted in full (8°, 
pp. 326), and to this a second part is added by John A. Chapman, 
A. M. (pp. 327-816, + vii). Among other material of much value the 
new part contains a supplementary paper by David Jones, of Ohio, 
on "The Friends and their Migration to Ohio" (pp. 329-358). 
From this paper a few additional facts are gathered (see the pres- 
ent volume, pp. 266-268). Z. Dicks visited Wrightsborough and 
Bush River in 1803. From the former he advised removal and 
predicted an internecine war within the lives of children then 
living. At Bush River he began his warning in a well built meet- 
ing house, erected only five years before with full expectation of 
long continued occupancy, and where Judge O'Neall says he often 
saw 500 Friends assembled, with the ominous words : " Oh, Bush 
River ! Bush River ! how hath thy beauty faded away and gloomy 
darkness eclipsed thy day!" These Friends and those from 
Georgia removed mostly to Miami, Warren and Clinton counties, 
O., and from there have spread over the West. Mr. Jones then 
gives a number of sketches of the leaders in the emigration, includ- 
ing members of the families given on pp. 279-280. The Bush River 
property still belongs to the Society, and an effort has been recently 
made to revive the Society and rebuild the meetinghouse. White 
Lick meeting-house was on the public road leading from Newberry 
C. H. to Long's Bridge on Little River, between Deadfall and the 
bridge, and within 200 yards of the residence of Mr. G. Henry 
Werts. The house was built of large hewn logs, and was also 
known as Coate's Meeting House. 



CHAPTER XII. 
The Renaissance of North Carolina Yearly Meeting. 

A list of the active meetings within the Hmits of the Yearly 
Meeting in 1869 has been preserved. This list may be 
taken as substantially representing the condition of Quak- 
erism at the close of the war. It may also be taken as a 
measure of the weakness of the Society superinduced by 
slavery. This list should be compared w'ith the other list 
given in the appendix where present conditions are indicated. 

This list is reproduced from the " Book of Meetings " for 
1869: 

Eastern Quarter: Monthly Meetings: (i) Rich Square, (2) 
Piney Woods; Meetings for worship: (i) Rich Square, (2) 
Piney Woods, (2) Up River. 

Western Quarter: MontJily Meetings : {f) Cane Creek, 

(2) Centre, (3) Spring; Meetings for worship: (i) Cane Creek, 
(i) Rocky River, (2) Providence, (2) Centre, (3) Spring, (3) 
Chatham, (3) South Fork. 

Deep River Quarter : Monthly Meetitigs : (i) Deep 
River, (2) Springfield, (3) Deep Creek; Meetings for wor- 
ship: (i) Deep River, (2) Springfield, (2) Pine Woods, 

(3) Deep Creek, (3) Hunting Creek, (3) Forbush Creek. 
Southern Quarter: MontJily Meetings : {\) Back Creek, 

(2) Marlborough, (3) Holly Spring; Meetings for worship: 
(i) Back Creek, (2) Little River (now Hopewell, near by), 
(2) Marlborough, (2) Salem, (3) Holly Spring, (3) Pine 
Ridge, (3) Bethel. 

New Garden Quarter: Monthly Meetings: (i) New 
Garden, (2) Dover; Meetings for worship: (i) New Garden, 
(2) Dover. 

Contentnea Quarter : Monthly Meetings: (i) Neuse, 
(2) Nahunta; Meetings for worship: (i) Neuse, (2) Nahunta, 
(2) Falling Creek. 



North Carolina Yearly Meeting. 309 

Lost Creek Quarter: Monthly Meetings: ii) New Hope, 
(2) Lost Creek, (3) Newberry; Meetings for worship: (i) 
New Hope, (2) Lost Creek, (3) Newberry/ 

The Work of Baltimore Association. 

The State of North Carolina -had the good fortune to be 
comparatively free from the horrors of war until toward the 
close of 1864. As the terrible realities of war began to 
draw nearer to the Quakers in that year, many of them began 
to seek homes, friends and relatives in the West. Before 
the war closed these emigrants usually went West by way 
of Baltimore. They frequently arrived there in a destitute 
condition and were forwarded to the West by Baltimore 
Friends. 

After the war closed and the usual routes of travel were 
open, the emigration began again with renewed strength. 
The man most prominent in this new migration was Addison 
Cofifin, a native of Guilford County, and born of Quaker 
parents in 1822. He became connected with the Under- 
ground Railroad as early as 1835, and the experience 
acquired in those days stood him in good stead in later 
years. On the third of May, 1843, Y^ set out from North 
Carolina for Indiana on foot. He reached Richmond, Indi- 
ana, in twenty-one days. This was the first of three trips 
from North Carolina to Indiana on foot, and each was made 
over a different route. His travels have extended into many 
parts of the West — to the Pacific, to Yucatan and Central 
America, to Europe and the Holy Land, and are not yet 
finished. After the war was over he chartered trains and 
organized a new migration. This migration, unlike those 

' Within the limits of the old Virginia Yearly Meeting there was 
the Virginia Half- Yearly Meeting with two monthly meetings: 
(1) Cedar Creek and (2) Lower, with four meetings for worship: 
(1) Richmond, (1) Cedar Creek. (2) Black Creek, (2) Somerton. At 
Hopewell there was also a monthly meeting (orthodox) consisting 
of the meeting for worship of the same name, and several meetings 
of Hicksite Friends. 



310 Southern Quakers and Slavery. 

at the beginning of the century, was consciously organized 
and made use of modem methods. Mr. Coffin says that 
between 1866 and 1872 he carried ten trains of emigrants 
each year from North Carolina to Indiana. They numbered 
more than fourteen thousand in all; nearly one-half were 
under ten years of age. Three out of five of his emigrants 
have made a success, while the other two were no worse oflf. 
But their children, having the advantage of schools, have 
done well. He has seen four of his barefoot Carolina boys 
become members of the Indiana Legislature. Others have 
met with success, particularly in Iowa and Kansas. 

All of these emigrants were by no means Quakers; there 
were some five hundred among the emigrants carried West 
by Mr. Coffin; but a general western exodus of Friends 
was threatened, and its consequences, had the movement 
not been checked, would have been very harmful to central 
North Carolina in removing a valuable class of its citizens. 

The man who, of all others, realized the importance of this 
movement, and who saw more clearly than others the neces- 
sity of keeping these Friends in their old homes, was Francis 
T. King of Baltimore. It was he who conceived the plan 
afterwards put into execution. His own liberal contribu- 
tions and the contributions of Friends throughout the world, 
many of whose yearly meetings he visited in the interests 
of this cause, and his constant personal service, made pos- 
sible its realization. Francis Thompson King was bom in 
Baltimore in 1819, and \vas a member of Baltimore Yearly 
Meeting. He spent a number of years in business, then 
retired from active life and devoted himself to the public 
service of his native city in the broadest and best sense of 
this term. He accepted positions of trust in connection 
with the public works and charital)lc institutions of the city, 
and performed similar duties outside the State. During the 
winter of 1863, although a strong Union man. he was 
intrusted by Southern sympathizers in Baltimore with 
$20,000 for the relief of Confederate prisoners confined in 
Fort Delaware, and although accountable to no one for the 



North Carolina Yearly Meeting. 311 

money, faithfully performed the trust. When this new 
migration of Friends to the West began, Mr. King realized 
that if the Southern States were to recuperate their forces 
they must do it by developing their own energies and 
resources, and began to use his influence to induce Friends, 
who chiefly represented the numerous class of small farmers, 
to retain their old homesteads and build up the waste places 
instead of carrying their industry and money out of the 
State. He felt that the Society of Friends, with their anti- 
war principles, could help both parties without suspicion, 
as their message was one of peace and reconciliation to all. 
To check this new migration, therefore, " The Baltimore 
Association of Friends to advise and assist Friends in the 
Southern States " was organized in the spring of 1865. 
Francis T. King was made president; Isaac Brooks, secre- 
tary; Jesse Tyson, treasurer; with an executive committee 
composed of Francis T. King, John C. Thomas, Dr. James 
Carey Thomas, Jesse Tyson, Francis White and Dr. Caleb 
Winslow, of whom the last two were natives of North Caro- 
lina. Their work of relief began in Contentnea Quarter, 
which had just been devastated by Sherman's army. The 
Association shipped them carloads of provisions and boxes 
of goods of all descriptions, including agricultural tools and 
household utensils of all sorts. But this assistance was not 
of the sort that pauperizes, for the object of the Association 
was to put their aid into such forms as would elevate Friends 
and make them self-sustaining. Its object was to help them 
first to educate their children and then to improve their lands. 
Many of those who had already gone to the West were 
induced to return and further migration was discouraged. 
This great work was only made possible through the per- 
sonal devotion which Mr. King gave to it. He made about 
thirty-five journeys to North Carolina at a time when travel 
was very difficult, and the success of the reorganization of 
this large and comparatively isolated region depended greatly 
on the personal inspiration of the open-air meetings which 
he held in villages, arousing the discouraged inhabitants to 
improve their exhausted farms and educate their children. 



312 Southern Quakers and Slavery. 

The Boarding School was reorganized; money was appro- 
priated for repairs and for paying the expenses of the children 
of Friends who had suffered most by the war. In 1866 the 
school was clear of debt and reported one hundred and 
twenty-six students. But it did not prosper greatly, and the 
number of students fell off largely during the next few years. 
A normal school for the training of teachers was opened 
this year. They secured capable instructors from the North ; 
the tuition was free; teachers of all denominations and from 
various sections attended. Their work had marked influ- 
ence, for some of their teachers were employed to give 
instruction in the State normals and were sought for by 
other institutions. 

The first annual report made to Baltimore Yearly Meeting 
in October, 1866, showed that $22,554.31 had been expended 
as follows: Repairs of New Garden School, furniture and 
tuition of thirty-six pupils, $4,817.50; for thirty primary and 
one normal school and aid to new school-houses, $4,710.36; 
relief to families and individuals, $12,936.40; office expenses, 
$90.05. During the second year nearly $19,000 was ex- 
pended. 

The greatest efforts of Baltimore Friends were put on the 
development of primary schools. In 1865 Friends in North 
Carolina had no schools, no good school-houses and no 
books. Mr. King attended the Yearly Meeting in 1865 and 
told Friends to start such schools as they could with the 
materials at hand, and that a superintendent would be sent 
them as soon as the proper man could be found. In a few 
weeks Prof. Joseph Moore, of Earlham College, Ind., w^as 
chosen and arrived on the scene of his labors in December, 
1865. He labored in this field for three years and was 
then succeeded by Allen Jay, also of Indiana, who took up 
the work of Professor Moore and conducted it successfully 
for eight years. In 1866 there were over thirty schools 
that received aid or entire supj^ort from the Baltimore Asso- 
ciation. In 1868 they reported forty schools with 2,588 
pupils; of these 1,430 were the children of Friends, and 



North Carolina Yearly Meeting, 313 

the average duration of the school year was six months 
and a half. In 1870 there were forty-one schools with 
2,774 children, 1,233 being Friends, and the average length 
of the school term was five months. Fifty-four teachers 
were employed, and most of the schools were reported as 
self-sustaining. In 1871 there were forty schools, 2,415 
pupils and sixty-two teachers, fifty-six of the latter being 
natives. This work lay principally in the Quaker localities 
of central North Carolina and received the hearty com- 
mendation of all regardless of party. Governor Worth, a 
representative of Nantucket stock, but not a Quaker, said 
that this movement was the most important phase of recon- 
struction that had come to his knowledge. 

Friends also emphasized and developed religious and edu- 
cational work in the Sunday-school. These were then given 
an impetus forward which they have not since lost. In 1867 
a normal school for the especial training of Sunday-school 
teachers was organized, and the experiment was repeated 
with success the next year. 

In the same way much attention was given to the schools 
for the freedmen. A committee had been appointed at an 
early date to take charge of this affair, and in 1867 reported 
six day and twenty-two Sunday-schools for them, with 
an estimated attendance from 1,600 to 2,000. In 1869 
twenty-four day-schools and thirty-five Sunday-schools are 
reported with 1,707 pupils. Dr. J- M. Tomlinson was ap- 
pointed superintendent in 1869. In 1870 he reported four- 
teen schools with five hundred and sixty pupils, and these 
were administered at an outlay of $1,161.74. The next year 
the pupils had increased to eight hundred and eight, the 
schools to sixteen, with an average length of four and a 
half months, and the expenses to $1,308.61. Both fell off 
in 1872, and from that time reports from these schools are 
uncertain. 

Baltimore Friends also put some $6,000 into an orphan 
house for colored orphans in Richmond and then trans- 
ferred its management to the colored pastors of the city. 

But school education was not the only form of the helpful 



314: Southern Quakers and Slavery. 

activity of the Baltimore Association. They probably did 
as much for agriculture as they had done for the schools. 
In 1867 they purchased the farm of Nathan Hunt, near High 
Point and in Guilford County, X. C, named it " Swarthmore 
farm," and put it under the care of William A. Sampson, a 
practical farmer. This model farm, with improved imple- 
ments, artificial manures, grasses, selected seeds and selected 
stock, became a practical school of agriculture, and demon- 
strated to Friends the great but neglected wealth of the 
soil; a widespread interest in agriculture was awakened; 
farmers' clubs were organized; the superintendent gave occa- 
sional lectures before them on agricultural topics, and the 
farm was visited by farmers from all parts of the State. In his 
fifth report in 1872, Superintendent Sampson estimates that 
the influence of this farm was felt for fifty miles around. He 
considered the main features of this influence as coming 
from the more extended use of clover, for it was estimated 
that 15,000 acres of land had been put in because of the suc- 
cessful example set at Swarthmore farm ; the next advantage 
was in the use of better implements and in better drainage. 
It was in connection with this work that a bone-mill, prob- 
ably the first in the South, was erected. This farm was 
also of service in stopping the westward migration. 

In 1872 Baltimore Association closed most of its work. 
The crisis had then passed. Friends and others w^ere recov- 
ering from the effects of the war. The schools were mostly 
self-supporting, and as soon as this point was reached there 
was no need of further aid. The schools were then placed 
under the care of an executive committee of the Yearly 
Meeting. They numbered thirty-eight, with sixty-two 
teachers and 2,358 pupils, and it was said that probably 
not one Friend's child in Xorth Carolina or Tennessee had 
been overlooked. The work was continued by North Caro- 
lina Friends, and in 1880 their superintendent could say with 
pride that there was probably no Quaker child between 
seven and twenty-one who could not read and write. The 
work was also carried on satisfactorily among the meetings 
in Tennessee. 



North Carolina Yearly Meeting. 315 

During the last few years of its existence the work of the 
Association was devoted mainly to the improvement of the 
New Garden Boarding School. The buildings were remod- 
eled and improved; new apparatus was provided; an endow- 
ment was started, and the end of the work was the rechar- 
tering of the institution as Guilford College. 

The total expenditures of the Baltimore Association up 
to 1887, when it dissolved, may be divided as follows: For 
physical relief, including net cost of model farm, $36,000; 
for schools (1865-1876), $60,000; for schools (1877-1883), 
$12,000; for Guilford College (1883), $i5>ooo; for Guilford 
College on endowment fund (1883), $8,000; for aid in repair- 
ing or building meeting-houses, $7,300; total, $138,300. 

Francis T. King was appointed to visit every Yearly Meet- 
ing in America to collect these funds, and the funds admin- 
istered by Baltimore Association were the contributions of 
the Quaker world, as will be seen from the report of receipts 
at the end of the second year in October, 1867: 

From London Yearly Meeting $22,494 

From Dublin " " 10,761 

From New York " '* 4,899 

From New England Yearly Meeting 3,606 

From Philadelphia " " 1,515 

From Baltimore " " 1,034 

From Indiana " " 1,213 

From Ohio " " 452 

From Iowa " • " 318 

From Western " " 200 

From interest on deposits 2,294 

Total contributions for the first two years, $48,786.52 

Baltimore Association acted as a sort of trustee in the 
collection and administration of this great charity. The 
activity and influence of Francis T. King have been promptly 
and properly acknowledged, for a large and commodious 



316 Southern Quakers and Slavery. 

building has been dedicated to his memory at Guilford Col- 
lege within the last few years/ 

In the same way and during the same period, Philadelphia 
Friends were engaged in supporting schools in North Caro- 
lina for the freedmen. In 1869 they report twenty-nine 
scb.ools with some forty teachers. It is estimated that they 
reached an enrollment of 2,000 for a number of years, and 
that $6,000 was spent in this work. The Philadelphia Asso- 
ciation of Women Friends also did educational work in 
Tennessee. Since 1874 New York Friends have spent some 
$18,000 on schools for whites as well as colored children.' 
They have also established a high grade school for colored 
pupils in High Point, N. C. New England Yearly Meeting 
has a college for colored people at Maryville, Tenn., and 
Indiana Yearly Meeting has one at Helena, Ark. 

North Caroli?ia Friends in 1875. 

The following account of Carolina Friends was written in 
1875 by Stanley Pumphrey, but the description is too 
gloomy to be taken for the Yearly Meeting as a whole. 
" The most enterprising left a worn-out soil not naturally 
fertile, and went West, leaving the less energetic on the old 
patrimonial homes. Their houses are often built of logs, 
and an upper stor\^ is the exception. The whole domestic 
arrangements are on a scale of startling simplicity. The 
produce raised on the farm supplies the table, bread made 
of Indian com meal, and pork, being the staple food, and 
the garments are often home-spun. Allen Jay assured me 
that many of the Friends did not handle fifty dollars in the 
year. The entire absence of windows from the dwellings 
is by no means an unusual experience." ... As for the 

' Partly from materials kindly furnished me by Miss E. T. King, 
of Baltimore. See also Cartland's Sovtheni Heroes, Chapter 24. 

'See the extensive discussion of this ])hase of educational work in 
Dr. Charles Lee Smith's History of Edneation in North Carolina. 

"There was a section in the counties of Yadkin. Iredell and Surry 
where the great lack of windows was about as stated above, and 
perhaps in one small section in Randolph County ; elsewhere the 



North Carolina Yearly Meeting. 317 

meeting houses, the better class are like barns, others are 
like poor sheds. They are often built of logs, roughly mor- 
tised together, and the spaces filled with mud. The lowest 
log is placed on piles of stones, and in one case the pigs 
had worked their way between these piles of stones and 
rendered the meeting house utterly untenantable." * 

The result of this visit was an appeal to Friends in Eng- 
land for help toward building better meeting-houses. 
Pumphrey says that the North Carolina Yearly Meeting 
had then built sixteen new meeting-houses since the war, 
that twelve more were needed, and four had been left unfin- 
ished for lack of funds. In the Southern Quarter, which is 
entirely within the limits of Randolph County, he reports 
that out of the ten meetings there were but two creditable 
houses. To this appeal for aid Friends of England and 
Ireland responded liberally and more than £i,ooo was con- 
tributed. This fund was also administered through the Bal- 
timore Association, and up to 1885 had been of service in 
Canada and in eight States, including North Carolina, Vir- 
ginia, Tennessee, Florida, Arkansas and Texas. 

Conclusion. 

The history of Carolina Friends during the last twenty 
years has been one of quiet and steady growth. There are 
few events that rise above the level of the whole. The 
most important of these, perhaps, was the rechartering of 
New Garden Boarding School, January 25, 1889, and its 

"entire absence of windows" was the rare exception. But the 
statements of Pumphrey are not surprising, for he was shown the 
worst parts of the Yearly Meeting, the object being to enlist the 
sympathies of English Friends. 

^Memories of Stanley Pumphrey, pp. 128, 131, 168-170. Oh that 
the early Quakers had written journals like this one ! See also 
Minutes of Baltimore Yearly Meeting, 1884. 1885. Thomas Shillitoe 
said in 1828 that the Quarterly Meeting at Westfield was held in a 
log house in November and that they sat with both doors open for 
light ; there was no convenience for making a fire, and they 
"found it to be a great exercise of patience to endure the cold." 
It was the same way at Sutton's Creek meeting-house, and at Wells 
daylight came through in twenty places. — Friends'' Library, III. 



318 Southern Quakers and Slavery. 

reorganization as Guilford College. It had graduated its 
first class as Friends' School in 1886. Its first class as a 
college was graduated in 1889. It is now well attended, well 
manned, in some lines is probably as well equipped for 
advanced work as any institution in the State, and under the 
presidency of L. L. Hobbs has won recognition as one of 
the best and most progressive institutions in North Carolina/ 

Friends have increased very largely in numbers since the 
war. In 1866, one thousand seven hundred and eight}--five 
members above eighteen years of age were reported, and 
a general migration to the West was threatened; in 1869 it 
was two thousand and one; in 1870 it was two thousand 
and sixty-eight; in 1876, owing probably to defects in the 
earlier reports, the number had jumped to four thousand 
two hundred and seventy-five, of w^hom one hundred and 
seventy-three were received by request. During the ten 
years 1876-1886 inclusive, the only years for which the 
proper statistics are to be had, it is found that almost the 
whole of the net gain in membership to the Society came 
from those who w^ere received by request, the births and 
certificates received about equaling those lost by death, 
disownment, certificate and resignation. 

The following tables will show the state of the meetings 
as reported by the Quarters to the Yearly Meeting. 

' Statistics of secondary education as reported to North Carolina 
Yearly Meeting in August. 1895 : Academies under care of Friends, 
six ; average time taught, eight months ; value of property. $9,000 ; 
no endowments ; value of apparatus, S60 ; total enrollment, five 
hundred and twenty; financial aid received, about SSOO ; Friends 
enrolled, about one hundred and fifty ; tuition received, $1,776.25 ; 
school buildings, seven ; acres of land in school premises, forty ; 
teachers, fourteen; advanced pupils, sixty-one: pupils preparing for 
college, five. These academies have been graded so as to fit pupils 
for Guilford College. 



North Carolina Yearly Meeting. 



319 



1883. 
Quarters. 

Eastern ■ . . 
Western • . 
New Garden . 
Deep River . 
Contentnea . 
Southern . . 
Lost Creek . 
Friendsville. 

Totals . . 


00 

be 

C 
S) 

■s 

u 

a 

3 

!z; 

5 

8 
3 
11 
7 
9 
8 
2 

53 


w 

01 
JO 

a 

o 

^^ 

B 
a 

a 
15 

696 
818 
260 
897 
593 
675 
941 
505 

5385 


GO 

01 

1 

>, 

,Q 

•a 
"S 

o 
1 

'§ 

66 
61 

24 
176 


01 
•u 

« 

s 

8 

>> 

■a 

I 
S 
o 

0> 

« 
1 

8 
3 
6 

5 
16 

39 


s 

■a 
> 
o 
o 

0) 

18 
22 

4 
12 
10 

9 
11 

9 

95 


"3 
+-> 

20 
45 
16 
84 
71 
14 
51 
9 

310 


-4^ 

a 

a 
o 

CO 

i3 

O 
(J 

' 3 

. . 
4 
4 

1 
1 

13 


o 
-IJ 
eS 
o 

s 

« 

o 
>. 

+J 
O 
1-^ 

2 
1 
6 
6 

10 

5 

15 

45 


a 
o 

ts 

c 

.bo 

'm 
01 

« 

O 

3 

2 

3 

10 

1 

7 
1 

27 


.n 
-M 
eS 
<0 
P 
t». 
.Q 

CO 

O 

10 

11 

4 

6 
10 

3 
10 

5 

59 


1 

15 
17 
10 
19 
24 
14 
23 
22 

144 


1 

5 

28 

6 

65 

47 

28 



166 


13 
13 



Quarters. 
1894. 



Eastern . . . 
Western . . • 
Southern . . . 
Deep River . . 
New Garden . 
Contentnea 
Friendsville . 
Yadkin Valley 
Totals . . 



1895. 



Eastern . . • 
Western . . • 
Southern - . . 
Deep River 
New Garden . 
Contentnea 
Friendsville . 
Yadkin Valley 
Totals . . 



4 
11 
10 

7 
5 



55 

4 

10 

10 

6 

4 

8 

2' 

10 



54 



274 
409 
478 
361 
225 
277 
198 
489 



2711 

310 
387 
478 
300 
216 
285 
383 
531 



2890 



fe 



262 

431 
498 
414 
252 
285 
204 
409 



2755 

314 
401 
498 
346 
225 
305 
390 

'3084 



9 
35 
55 
32 
64 
18 
61 
261 



535 

11 
26 
55 
26 
16 
14 
48 
123 



319 



12 
15 
88 
71 
19 
10 
58 
26 



299 

19 
12 
88 
30 
51 
11 
33 
27 



271 



Final total of members for 1892 
Final total of members for 1894'' 
Final total of members for 1895 



5301 
5702 

6022 



' Report of 1892, but evidently too small a number. 
^ Report of 1894 ; none made in 1895. 
^No statistics in 1893. 



320 Southern Quakers and Slavery. 

The growth of Southern Friends since the war b.as been, 
so far as can be seen, a healthful growth. This applies to 
Tennessee as well as to North Carolina, for in the former 
State Friends have more than doubled since i860, and they 
have now secured a footing in Florida, Arkansas, Louisiana 
and Texas. This increase in numbers is due largely to the 
fact that modern methods are beginning to be employed. 
Much attention is given to evangelistic and mission w^ork, 
and this accounts for large accessions in various quarters. 
In addition to this, Sunday-schools, temperance, peace, 
Indians, orphans, education, and similar matters are now- 
taking the place of that one absorbing question wdth w'hich 
this paper has been principally concerned, and which more 
than anything else drove Friends to plant the banner of 
civilization in the Valley of the Mississippi, now their strong- 
hold. With this question settled, with increasing numbers 
and increasing wealth, with better methods and the same 
unconquerable enthusiasm, there is reason to hope for a 
future brighter than the past. 

The North Carolina Yearly Meeting now^ includes the 
meetings in that State and Friendsville Quarter, in Ten- 
nessee. It is still one of the largest meetings in the United 
States, being sixth in numbers. Its daughter, Indiana 
Yearly Meeting, stands first' North Carolina Yearly fleet- 
ing has suffered most of all, perhaps, from emigration. 
It can look on all the Yearlv Meetinsfs in the West and sav 



' The statistics of Quakers in the United States, according to the 
census of 1890. is as follows, by States: Orthodox :— Ark., 338; 
Cal., 1,009; Col.. 38: Del., 122; D. C. 19; Fla., 70: 111.. 2.015: Ind.. 
25.915: Ind. Ter., 468; Iowa, 8.146; Kans., 7.762: La., 66: Me.. 1.430; 
Md..525; Mass., 1.560; Mich., 1,433; Minn., 305: Mo.. 615: Neb.. 782; 
N. H., 413; N. J., 982; N. Y.. 3.644; N. C, 4,904: O., 10.884; Okl., 
108; Or., 766; Penn.. 3,490; R. I.,617; S. D..266; Tenn., 1.001; Tex.. 
120; Vt. 251: Va.. 387; W. Va., 50; Wis.. 154; total, 80,655. Hick- 
site :— Del., 622; D. C, 40; 111.. 440; Ind., 1.376; lo., 440; Md., 1.547: 
Mich., 25; Neb., 198; N. J.. 2.279: N. Y.. 3.331; O.. 1,187; Penn., 
10,001; Va., 506; total, 21,992. Wilburites :— Ind.. 489; lo.. 1.539; 
Kan.. 495; Mass., 28; O.. 1.076; Penn., 30; R. I , 72; total, 4,329. 
Primitive :— Mass.. 14; N. Y., 103; Penn.. 106: R. 1.9; total, 232. 

By Yearly Meetings: Orthodox :— Baltimore. 1.012; Ind.. 22,105; 
Iowa, 11.391; Kans., 9,347; New England, 4,020; N. Y., 3,895; N. C, 



North Carolina Yearly Meeting. 321 

with truth, " these are my children." It has seen its members 
go forth and become leaders in the Middle West. It has 
given to Western Friends such leaders as Thomas Beales, 
said to have been the first white emigrant to settle in Ohio; 
William Williams, Dougan Clark, Elijah Coffin, Charles F. 
Coffin, Charles Osborn, who first advocated unconditional 
emancipation in his paper, 77ic' PhilantJiropist, the first 
abolition journal in America, when William Lloyd Garrison 
had just entered his teens. And it gave them Vestal Coffin, 
the founder, and Levi Coffin, for thirty years the president, 
of the Underground Railroad. This is a part of North Caro- 
lina's contribution to the settlement of the West and to the 
abolition of slavery. Her influence has extended to the 
Pacific, where California Yearly Meeting has been organized 
within a year. And these young children still turn to the 
mother meeting for guidance; for the first president of Whit- 
tier College, the new Quaker institution on the Pacific, was 
John W. Woody, who went from the same meeting from 
which so many men great in the annals of Quakerism have 
gone, — from New Garden Monthly Meeting, Guilford 
County, North Carolina. 

5,905; O., 4,733; Philadelphia, 4,513; Western, 13.734; (Cal. and 
Wilmington Yearly Meetings — the latter composed of meetings in 
w^est and southwest Ohio — were organized since the census was 
taken); total, 80,655. Hicksite :— Baltimore, 2.797; Genesee, 751; 
111., 1,301; Ind., 1,743; N. Y., 2,803; O.. 568; Philadelphia, 12,209; 
total, 21,992. Wilburites :— Iowa, 714; Kans., 495; New England, 
100; O., 2,451; Western, 569; total, 4,329. Total Quakers in United 
States, 107.208. For detailed statistics of Southern Quakers see 
Appendix I. 



I 



APPENDIX I. 

Detailed Statistics of Southern Quakers according 
TO Census of 1890. 



NouTH Carolina. 

Alaruance . . 

Chatham . . . 

Davidson. . . 

Guilford . • • 

Iredell . • • 

Moore . . . . 
Northampton 

Perquimans . 

Randolph . . 

Robeson . . ■ 

Sampson . . . 

Surry . . . . 

Wayne . . . 

Yadkin . . • 



Tennessee. 

Blount 

Greene 

Jefferson 

Knox . 

Loudon 

Monroe 



Totals for North Caro- 
lina Y. M 



1 
6 
1 
1 
2 
2 
10 
1 
1 
2 
7 
6 



47 



5 
1 
6 
1 
1 
1 
15 



62 



43 



1,400 

850 

300 

2,900 

200 

200 

1,000 

1.200 

4.000 

75 

250 

750 

2,400 

1,950 



51 



17,475 



1,525 

GOO 
350 
500 



2,975 



20,450 



iy 



h. 1 
sh. 5 



sh. 1 



11 



150 



300 



450 



100 
875 



J75 
550 



1,000 



a 

P 

O 

> p. 



32,500 

1,100 

500 

13,600 

300 

200 

1,100 

2.000 

5,000 

200 

600 

1,900 

4,850 

3,000 



36,85U 



6,100 

2,500 
4U0 
400 



9,400 



846,250 



a 
3 

a 

B 
o 
o 



263 

278 

50 

987 

65 

45 

292 

338 

1,077 

10 

78 

255 

758 

408 

4,904 



528 

79 

275 

25 

76 

1^8 

1,001 



5,90 



Detailed Statistics of Southern Quakers. 323 



Virginia (to Balto. T. M.) 

Frederick Co. 
Henrico • . • 
Loudoun . . . 
Nansemond . 
Southampton 



Arkansas. 

Benton (to Kan. Y.M.) 

Phillips (to Ind.Y.M.) 

Washington (to Kan. 

Y. M.) 



Florida (to Ind. Y. M.) 



Alachua 
Marion 



Louisiana (to Iowa Y. M.) 
Acadia .... 



Texas (to Iowa Y. M.) 
Crosby 



HiCKSiTES (to Balto. Y.M.) 
Virginia. 

Fairfax .... 
Frederick . . . 
Loudoun . . . 



a 
o 

a) 

M 

'3 

bo 

u 
O 

1 
1 
1 
1 

8 


CO 

o 

2 
-3 

o 

.a 
p 

3 

o 


&o 
p 

to . 

^^ 


6 

ID 


'3 

t 
m 
o 
bo 
_p 
+3 
sS 
4) 
M 


ja 
o 
u 

<t-l >i 

?2 


1 
1 
1 
1 
3 


350 
400 
400 
300 

850 






$600 
8,000 
3,500 
1,20(1 
1.600 


7 

2 
2 

1 


7 

1 
2 


2,3U0 

100 
400 

500 

300 
75 


h. 1 
ph. 1 


100 


$14,900 

i3l50 
1,800 


5 

1 
1 
2 

1 
1 

1 
4 
2 


3 

1 
1 


2 


100 

75 
150 


$1,950 

$1,000 

200 

$1,200 

$600 
4.700 
8,000 


2 

1 
4 
2 


375 

200 
1,700 
1,300 


sh. 1 
sh. 1 


7 


7 


3,200 






$13,300 



84 

58 
62 

27 
206 
387 



106 
205 

27 
338 



45 
70 



66 



120 



53 
123 
330 
506 



APPENDIX II. 

Time and Place of holding Yearly Meetings in 
Virginia and North Carolina, 1702-1895. 



1703 

1703 

1704 

1705 
1706 

1707 
1708 
1709 
1710 

1711 

1712 
1713 
1714 
1715 
1716 
1717 
1718 
1719 
1720 
1721 
1722 
1723 
1724 
1725 
1726 
1727 
1728 
1729 
1730 
1731 
1732 
1733 



ViBOiNiA Yearly Meeting. 



f Pagan Creek(LevyNeck) 

I [Isle of Wight Co.] 

Levy Neck (same as P. C. ) 

/Levy Neck, at "Public 

\ M. H." 

Levy Neck 

Levy Neck 

Lev}^ Neck 

Levy Neck 

Levy Neck 

Levy Neck 

f Chuckatuck (Nanse 

t mond Co.) 

Levy Neck 

Chuckatuck 

Levy Neck . 

Chuckatuck 

Levy Neck 

Chuckatuck 

Levy Neck • 

Chuckatuck 

Levy Neck 

Chuckatuck 

Levy Neck . 

Chuckatuck 

Levv Neck . 



North Carolina Yearly 
Meeting. 



Mentioned by Y. M, re- 
cords of 1755 



•'In North Carolina 
"In North Carolina 
"In North Carolina 
"In North Carolina 
"In North Carolina 
"At Perquimmans' 
"At Perquimmans' 
"At Perquimmans' 
"At Perquimmans' 
"At Perquimmans' 
"At Perquimmans' 
"In North Carolina 
"At Paquamons" . 
"In North Carolina 
"In North Carolina 
"At paquamons" . 
Not given. 
Perquimans . . - 
Perquimans ■ . . 
Perquimans . . . 
Perquimans . . . 
Perquimans 
Perquimans . . • 
Perquimans 
In Nortli Carolina 
In Nortli Carolina 
In North Carolina 



Time and Place of Yearly Meetiuf/s. 



325 



1734 
1735 
1736 
1737 
1738 

1739 

1740 
1741 

1742 

1743 
1744 
1745 
1746 
1747 
1748 
1749 
1750 
1751 
1752 
1753 
1754 
1755 
1756 
1757 
1758 

1759 

1760 
1761 
1762 
1763 
1764 
1765 
1766 
1767 
1768 
1769 
1770 
1771 
1772 
1773 
1774 
1775 
1776 
1777 



Virginia Yearly Meeting. 



Chuckatuck 

Western Branch M. H. . 
f M. H. near John Mur- 

\ daugh's 

Chuckatuck 

Western Branch .... 
J" Nansemond (=: Chucka- 

l tuck?) 

Naneemond 

Nansemond 

Nansemond 

Waynoak, Charles City co. 

Nansemond 

Henrico Co. (Curies ?) . 

Nansemond 

Curies 

Nansemond 

Curies 

Isle of Wight 

Curies 

Western Branch .... 

Curies 

W. Br. (Isle of Wight Co.) 

Curies 

f W. Br. (of Nansemond 
< river, but in Isle of 

I Wight Co.) 

Curies 

Black Water in Surry Co. 

Curies 

Black Water 

Curies 

Black Water 

Curies 

Black Water 

Curies 



North Carolina Yearly 
Meeting. 



Perquimans 

Perquimans 

North Carolina 

Perquimans 

Perquimans 

Not given 

Perquimans 

Not given 

Not given 

Not given 

Perquimans 

Perquimans 

Perquimans 

Perquimans 

Perquimans 

Perquimans 

Perquimans 

Perquimans 

Old Neck 

Old Neck 

Old Neck 

Old Neck 

Old Neck 

Old Neck 

Old Neck 

Old Neck 

Old Neck 

Old Neck 

Old Neck, Perquimans co. 
Old Neck, Perquimans co. 
Old Neck, Perquimans co. 
Old Neck, Perquimans co. 
Old Neck. Perquimans CO. 
Old Neck, Perquimans co. 
Old Neck, Perquimans co. 
Old Neck, Perquimans co. 
Old Neck . Perquimans co. 
Old Neck, Perquimans co. 
Old Neck, Perquimans co. 
Old Neck, Perquimans co. 
Old Neck, Perquimans co- 
Old Neck, Perquimans co. 
Old Neck, Perquimans co. 



320 



Southern Quakers and Slavery. 



Virginia Yearly Meeting. 



1778 
1779 
1780 
1781 
1782 
1783 

1784 

1785 

1786 

1787 

1788 

1789 

1790 

1791 

1792 

1793 

1794: 

179o| 

1796 j 

17971 

17981 

17991 

18001 

1801 

1802 

1808 

1804 

1805 

1806 

1807 

1808 

1809 
1810 
1811 
1812 
1813 
1814 
1815 
1816 
1817 
1818 
1819 
1820 
1821 
1822 
1823 



Curies and Waynoak . . 

Curies and Waynoak 
f Black Creek, Southamp- 
\ ton Co 



Waynoak 

Black Creek 

Waynoak 

Black Water 

Waynoak 

Black Water 

Waynoak 

Black AVater 

Waynoak 

Black Water V 

Waynoak 

Black Water 

Waynoak 

Black Water 

Waynoak 

f Gravelly Run, Dinwid 

\ die Co 

Waynoak 

Gravelly Run 

AVaynoak 

Gravelly Run 

Waynoak . . . . 

Gravelly Run 

Waynoak 

Gravelly Run 

Waynoak . . . 

Gravelly Run 

Waynoak 

Gravelly Run 

Waynoak 

Gravelly Run 

Waynoak 



North Carolina Yearly 
Meeting. 



Old Neck, Perquimans co. 
Old Neck, Perquimans co. 
Old Neck, Perquimans CO. 
Old Neck, Perquimans co. 
Old Neck, Perquimans co. 
Old Neck. Perquimans co. 

Old Neck,Perquimansco 
Old Neck. Perquimans CO 
Little River, Perq. Co . . 
Centre, Guilford Co. . . 
Wells, Perquimans Co. . 

Centre • • 

Symons's Creek .... 

New Garden 

Symous's Creek .... 

New Garden 

Symons's Creek .... 

New Garden 

Symons's Creek .... 

New Garden 

Little River 

New Garden 

Little River 

New Garden 

Little River 

New Garden ..... 

Little River 

New Garden 

Little River 

New Garden 

Little River 

New Garden 

Little River 

New Garden 

Little River 

New Garden 

New Garden 

New Garden 

New Garden 

New (iarden 

New Garden 

New Garden 

New Garden 

New Garden 

New Garden 

New Garden 



10 
10 
10 
10 
10 
10 

10 
10 
10 
10 
10 
10 
10 
10 
10 
10 
10 
10 
10 
10 
10 
10 
10 
10 
10 
10 
10 
10 
10 
10 

10 
10 
10 
10 
10 
10 
10 
10 
10 
10 

11 
11 
11 
11 
11 
11 



i 



Time and Place of Yearly Meetings. 



327 



1824 
1825 
1826 
1827 
1828 
1829 
1830 
1831 
1832 
1833 

1834 

1835 
1836 
1837 
1838 
1839 
1840 
1841 
1842 
1843 
1844 



Virginia Yearly Meeting. 



Gravelly Run 

Waynoak 

Gravelly Run 

Waynoak 

Gravelly Run 

Waynoak 

Gravelly Run 

Waynoak 

Gravelly Run 

Cedar Creek 

/ Somerton, Nansemond 

I Co 

Cedar Creek 

Somerton 

Cedar Creek 

Somerton 

Cedar Creek 

Somerton 

Cedar Creek 

Somerton 

Cedar Creek 

Somerton 



North Cauolina Yearly 
Mektinq. 



New Garden . . 
New Garden . . 
New Garden • • 
Guilford County 
New Garden . . 
New Garden . . 
New Garden . . 
New Garden . . 
New Garden . . 
New Garden ■ . 

New Garden • . 
New Garden . . 
New Garden . . 
New Garden . • 
New Garden ■ • 
New Garden • • 
New Garden • ■ 
New Garden . . 
New Garden . . 
New Garden . • 
New Garden . . 



From 1845 to 1879 inclusive, North Carolina Yearly- 
Meeting was held regularly at New Garden; in 1880 at 
Friendsville, Tenn.; 1881-83 at New Garden; since 1883 it 
has been held regularly at High Point, N. C., in August. 



APPENDIX III. 

List of Friends' M?:etings in thk Southern States. 

In the following list is given the name of every meeting 
of which the author has been able to find mention during the 
progress of his work. Such facts as may help to fix the 
limits of the period each was in existence, its location, 
the superior meetings to which each belonged, etc., are 
added. The list here given should be compared with the map, 
Alost of the principal meetings will be found on the map, but 
all mentioned in the following list will not be found located 
there, for the reason that it has been found impossible to get 
sufficiently accurate data in many cases. In all such cases 
the location has been indicated as nearly as possible. Some 
of the data given is only approximate and there are doubt- 
less some errors and omissions in the list. The author will 
be thankful for any corrections or additions. The names 
printed in italics are of meetings no longer in existence. 

Yearly Meetings: 

Baltimore (Orthodox); from 1789 to date. 
Baltimore (Hicksite); from 1828 to date. 
North Carolina; settled 1698, to date. 
Philadelphia; from 1732 to 1789, when its territory 

was transferred to Baltimore. 
Virginia; settled about 1698, laid down 1844. 

Quarterly Meetings: 

Bush River ; N. C. Y. M.; settled 1791, laid down 
about 1808; included all meetings in South Caro- 
lina and Georgia; had Bush River, Cane Creek 
and Wrightsborough W. M.'s. 
Chester; Phila. Y. M.; Hopewell and Fairfax M. M.'s 
in northern Virginia, were joined to this Q. when 
first organized; superseded by Western O. 



Meetings in the Southern States. 32'.) 

Chuckatuck; Va. Y. M.; was cut out of the Lower 
Quarter in 1706 for Surry, Levy Neck and Chuck- 
atuck and was to serve as a sort of middle ground 
between the Upper and Lower Quarters; this meet- 
ing gives place to the Lower Quarter again- 

Contentnea; N. C. Y. M.; settled 1788 and opened 
1789; had in I793 Contentnea, Core Sound and 
Trent M. M/s and included all Friends in Carteret, 
Hyde, Craven, Jones, Beaufort and Edgecombe 
counties; now includes those in Johnston, Samp- 
son, Greene and Wayne counties, N. C, and has 
Woodland, Nahunta and Neuse M. M.'s 

Deep River; N. C. Y. M.; settled 1818; then com- 
posed of Deep River and Springfield M. M.'s; now 
has Springfield, High Point and Deep River 

M. M.'s. 
Eastern; N. C. Y. M.; settled about 1681; for 
meetings in Pasquotank, Perquimans and North- 
ampton counties; has always included all the M. 
M.'s in northeastern N. C; and has Piney Woods 
and Rich Square M. M.'s. 
Fairfax; Baltimore Y. M.; settled 1769; superseded 
Western; for meetings in Frederick, Fairfax and 
Loudoun counties, Va.; now made up of Alexan- 
dria, Fairfax, Goose Creek and Hopewell M. M.'s 

(all H-)- o • 1 ^ 11 

Friendsville; N. C. Y. M.; settled 1871; mcludes all 

meetings in Eastern Tennessee. 

Lost Creek; N. C. Y. M.; settled 1802; laid down 
1888; meetings transferred later to Friendsville Q. 

Loxver ■ Va. Y. M.; settled as eariy as 1696; laid down 
1844; also called Black Water and by the names 
of the various meeting-houses at which it was held 
from time to time; for meetings in lower Virginia. 

New Garden; N. C. Y. M.; settled 1787, opened 1788; 
then composed of New Garden. Deep River, Bush 
River, Wrightsborough and Westfield M. M.'s; 



330 Southern Quakers and Slavery. 

now has New Garden, Greensboro and Dover 
M. M.'s. 

Southern; X. C. Y. i\I.; settled 1819; then composed 
of Back Creek, Holly Springs and Marlborough 
M. M.'s; now of Back Creek, Marlboro, Science 
Hill and Holly Springs ^I. AI.'s. 

Upper ; Va. Y. M.; settled about 1700, laid down 
1844; also called Cedar Creek; for Upper Virginia 
meetings. 

Western ; Va. Y. AI.; settled 1797, laid down 181 7; 
for Goose Creek and South River M. M.'s. 

Western; Phila. Y. M.; settled 1758; included meet- 
ings in northern Mrginia. 

Western; N. C. Y. M.; settled 1759; first had Cane 
Creek and New Garden M. M.'s; Dunn's Creek 
M. ]\I. was added in 1760; after 1788 had only 
Cane Creek and Centre; now has Spring, Cane 
Creek and Centre; for Alamance, Chatham and 
parts of Randolph counties, N. C. 

Westfield; X. C. Y. M.; settled 1803, laid down 1832; 
had Westfield. Alt. Pleasant and Deep Creek 
M. M.'s; for Surr}- and Stokes, N. C, Grayson and 
Carroll counties, Va. 

Yadkin Valley; N. C. Y. M.; settled 1887; has Deep 
Creek, East Bend, Hunting Creek, Harmony 
Grove, in Yadkin County, and Westfield and 
White Plains M. AI.'s, in Sum- Countv, N. C. 



o 
p 

a 
o 
■*^ 

a 



. 00 
OD O 

at CO 



c3 

"^ c c S J. 



W 



o 
o 

P3 



CD 



5 to EC 

. O c3 



EC 



a o fl 






co." tc 

OJr-. Q 

C 03 






TS 



c3 ■ " 









W CO M ^ 

E S & fl 
^ ^ © 5 



CU -» *"• 

rt c3 C3 • 
rVj-j^pH 00 

'^ ^ ^ CD 



^ 'O^ o 

PI S 1^ =4 "oD 
O ci <D — g 



p^ 



o 

•so 
W 2 



^ O U - v^ 

o '^'o ao 

QJ o fl s C 

=5 ^ " s-i ^ 



C >- e ^ 
3 <B C 



rt fi M <i> a 






o 



cq 



^ P.'O 






CO a 



.00 . — I 



O 1— I t^ 

lO -+* o • 
CO 00 oo 'O 



(>) 



ooi:ocooocoao<^»occcM'*c>DOco 
t^t^t^cot^r^t^cor^cot^t^t^co 



^^n 



»o CO t^ o 

O Oi lO t^ 
OO t^ t^ t^ 



CO 05 
t^ CO 



CO 05 C<1 
rfi CO t^ 
t~- t^ I>- 



C '-' o 
COT 

'- s 



fl ^ r- > r-5fi« "^ ^ ^ rH*^ 5 C! ^ 

_:d .d .d d .d .d luq_: ■'^'^ .d>dd^d>od> 
• d .rj .d d .d .d .c^jd . .dd .odd ddc 

.::::: ::;:: i:: :;:::::::::: : 

a ^ . . .Vv .' ^ £» • 



- a? bo 
S ® o 



!0 O 






Cm O 

2 1=! 



P- :2 






,2 -- ffi 



^ ^ 



^ "Hi 



«:5 



-2 -= o 



O 

a 

3 
O 


O 
»-] 






CO 



ig. 

of .5 C 
a<W o 

'^ • ):i 
3 fe ;;: 

5 9 aj 



m 2 



d 



- C 03 * 

: c OS J 



oi 8 a '^ ^ ^ a3 r:~S 



55 ^ o 
rt S ^ . 

■ h-l 

<D a; 

•- (B 

00 



fl) 


UJ 


n 


s 




a] 




« 


PU 


•- 


qT 





bC 




" 


^ 



OQ 2 

.- O 

tn P. 
O .^ 



■ a ** 
^ s o 



°^5-" 






- «-5 



^^ »-c (U 

o 2^ 

'-' "^ O ;-» c3 >-»'^ 



• 2 a^ 

« i=! O 3 



l-l OQ C flO 
_ oj y o rS — g 

■5 S 03 o O-^^ 



." o 
-Cm 

•- 1*^ 5. 
§ ccc 

00 O l- 

■-it-; O! 

rS CO 
.- cS 

_ -^^ o 



00 



o 

O 



>2 CCM 



tC o 

.0 



c J- « 

^^ o a 
<°o o 



<B 



O G^ 






rt O 



-2>-§ 



, ^ 




'^ c^i . . .0 


CO . , 


C5 . 


<M . 




. '^ 




-5 S M £ 




—.CO CO 05 


-fi 


• f~~* 




CI 


. TT 




00 00 ... 00 CO .. . 


00 . 


'C CO . 


, 




■3-S ""^ 




»-H rH T— < 


T— 1 


t-^ 


. r-i 




I— 1 








<J 






— 










« 




"O 1 — 


CO 


-fl 05 — ' -* 00 


. c^o 10 


•^ r-H 


-V t^ 


t^ -t. -t> 


rH 


cocq 


CJ^-O 


00 




Ci 05 CO 


<M C5 


Oi 00 


OS 05 C5 ^H 








1^ 

I— ( 


t^oocooo . 

,-(1-1 1— 1 i-H r-l 


. 00 t^ t^ 

r-( 1— ( rH 


00 00 

1-1 r-l 


. t^ 00 

I— 1 1—1 


1^00 00 00 
T-l ,— 1 1— 1 rH 


I— 1 


00 r- 


®S.2 
CO -Sis 


e 















« e 









CS 



c 2 



- _ , ,ii! I) C C O.*^ <*H 
O 4J * '— ''JH "C <l>tT c3 



^S 5 53.5 
is -3 &:-S- 

a) c3 o cS c4 



>« rz; .^ ^ T3 
« > > a >^ 
a> OQ 00 >- 00 0; 

^ c: C J fi^ 
00 ■— — I 3 •— X\ 
O >- t- c'^^S 

►JfefiiaiP^2; 



(V 

G 

G S: 

o o 




_: . .00 .oooo^- 00 .o^- 000000 o . 

04 rt*.-cj....oJ ..c4.oJ 08 

m >>S5:z;>^;;z!z5;z;m ;z; t?; > Sz^ eq ^z; :z; iz; 55 !?; ^5 !?:> 



. .00 . a god . 
> t> Js; 55 ^ H H !« 55 1> 



00 .0 . 
. . oj . oa 

S?; 5^ > S5 > 



a a c,^ a 
a a a '-^ a - 

a) a> O • 0> CS 

Eh H H :^. H > 



O . 

. cS 



w 



o 
O 



• 'Ji 



^ s oO 



■i— 1-' aC- 

*- --»ji2 a o ^ ^ '-" (u 
f^jSa'i^^ajr'^"^ 



^ c'^ 8 G 
a,G^^ " 



OJ a,,t o 
oOa^o 
°° G r-s 

•2 0>H»2 

HHKj.«=i<i 



c 


-e 


4!^ 


• s 


.= a. 


rt S 


t> -^o 


G 1 


>.e 


^s 


fc- s 


c3^C> 


03 .« 


S^ 


5^^ 



rt o o ^ 



e8 O ,^ f^ 

^3 



TT 



pq 



.2 c 



2 oJ 3<1 •S'^o 

Tlrt a '-> .03. -UK 

5 ^ > ■ o v" <i3 Mfe ^ .., 2 






6C 









3Oo-ga3o^!H>-^5^acsCL|3O'='5r^2'=5*a303~.7'i2A 
^ pqOO(nScL,!z;;ggc)Q<1 tf gb p., gL, i-:; ^ ^ S <1 P-i kS tf 



o 

gp^ 53''73 52 





1. d.' 

1. d.' 
1. d. 

1815 

'1. d.' 
1. d. 
1858 


• 


10 -rf iM rfi CO <M 05 . 

•eOlOO-T-ooCicocoeo 

■TS 00 00 00 '^ "o TS t^ l>- 00 00 00 . 

,1— IrHi— 1 . . .1— It— li— li— (1— ( 

« <a « 


CO 

. 00 'C 
>— 1 . 


I-H 

3 


>0 CTs 01 ^ Oi 00 10 05 
oor^i>-£^cot^t^oo ,r^t>-t^ 


1—1 


<M -*i CO C<l , 
01 05 

t^ t^ 00 t^ . 


. C^ '^ iffl r^ CO 

10 CO 00 00 00 

. t^ t^ t^ 00 t^ r- 00 

■ e <i ^i «' « «' 


new 

1773 
a.l702 


03 
03 
3 

a 

3 




Lost Creek 

New Garden 

Friendsville 

Lower 

New Garden 

Eastern 

Eastern 

Southern 

Lost Creek 

Fairfax 

Upper 

Western 


03 
> 

a 

03 
03 
P 


Lower 

Eastern 

Eastern 

Contentnea 

Westfield 

Upper 

Lower 

Bush River 

Eastern 

Lower 

Westfield 

Upper 

Yadkin Valley 


Contentnea 
Bush River 
Lower 




odd .dddod^ .d 
•2^' ;z5 ^^i > fe5 ^' z iz ^ M > 13 


d 


.dddd . .zjd .d .d 


^:^:o3 


d 


rt^ . m 03 . , . Qj TO C3 . 


d 

!z' 


.dddd . .do* .d .d 














. 










::::.■ 1 - 










« 




s 


ii 


03 


« 


CO 


3 








oq-r 


-« 


e3 


S 93 





PL, 


5-<C 


■» 


03 



r^ f^ fi S T^ ^ ^ '^ rti ^ ^^ '♦^ •<-H •c-l ^ iS ^ *^ •-£, e* *> >^ Ji? 00 ^'^ "^ ^ ^ V* t 



ii 



rt C j: 



03 "o s a 



"O A'^ 
o S M 






<^ 9 
>- o 






BP e3 
«"« bo 

.25 S 

I, (D U 

a! o O 



*'5 2 

c3 P3 en 

•- (S . 

t: '^ if 

CO c 

i^ • 

• ^ ci a 

>-^ p Oi 



-fl r' 



^ '-^ .^ _„• -e 

— — 5 4)00^ 



c s 



'- 2 

OS 

— O 



at ^^ o 

-< o G c 



a a ow 






2 '^ 



O) 

o a'o 

• o d- 

a> ,-1 
^ o « 

2 o T 
1=5 O 

TO^ 

O ^ 45 



W ^ 






W 



"2 

W o 



4) a 
c =^ 

CS CD 

a-S 



a- 



t-5 O 
. (1 

> .X2 
< m <u 

i -^ 

?a^ 



<i> 



O) 



;co 



O) 



7;:S •--T^'cg « 



"-I "^ fl 



»■-»•' I"*) 









c 




,Q 




o 


6 


a 




s 
o 




o 




o 


n3 

Hi 


6 


C 

a 

c 

0/ 


o 


o 

cc 
O 


o 
o 


C 
to 




a 


o 




w 




euS5 



^a 

--■ jr o 



a 6"^ 

c^ LO O T 

- C '-^ 0^ 

^ go.. 



< 



^ 



B^ 



ti.9 



c^tf 



00 'O'O , 



in .-1 
COCO 



Si, 



»o 05 CO ci m 00 

C^ t-- I— I te UO CO C5 
CO t^ t- J t- t- t^ 



CO O 

CO 00 



i; ■_. t° 

cS >- a> 

a) '^ ^ 
— a; S 

<500 



, 




^ 


^ 


^^ 


o 


0) 




a; 


«a 


0) 




hf 


^ 


^ 




4> 


^ 


a 

CO 





o 



^ aj 
(D o 

Go 



O 



a 
o 









o rt 



O) to 

a a> 









S a 



p 05'- 

« ® ° 



O ^ h ^ X? G 



■tf 



0) 



C& D & C fn cc t> 



0) CO 



C5 » 



aj a> 


«»-c 


OT ^ 


. ^ 


c4 O 


c« 


WtJ 


[£< 



f= rt 3 
O * o 

0>cc 



cc rn C3 


o3 o5 oj . c3 . tS 


dd 


d 


la 03 


d 


d . 


[ZiCO 


N. C. 
Bal. 

N. C. 


6 

03 


. . .d .d . 

ol 05 rt .03 . ca 

;> > t> ?^. > !?; t> 


dd 


d 


oS 


d 

CO 


d . 

:2;> 


. o! 


d .d 

. 03 . 



.5 . ^ a> 4) . 
C S aJ 4J (u ^ 

5.2 I^ocj-S 

^ j; ~. O O iJ -; 

.C! fc ~, ^, ca 03 e 

-t; -^ T- „5 pa PQ cq 






!o Cb 



■So 



cqcq 



cq 



to »> 

Dqcq 



:^ 



Oq cqcq cqCq 



ca 4) V 

a> 4) 4> 
PQpapQ 



a 

s 
.ft 

S OS 

S en 



o 









. O 






o) a) 



§ao 



3-a 

6 oo 

age: 

O yj . 



ej t- rt 
^ r^ 2 

■- ,;h:i 
is ^ . 

ii • CO 



w 



O 0) 



as 

03 T 



O 



"^ ^ \U 



oa-S| 

McoPhZ; 



<r> 






(M 


GQ 




CO 






05 


fl 




t^ 


6 


O 


1— 1 


03 

a 




Tl 


o^ 


TS 






p>^ 


o 


^ 


3 


pi 


r; 


!h 


!-4 


c 


cr 3 




Sh 




T" 




o 


S 


3 
CO 


P^ 


S 


o-ipq 



c4co > O rt 

c3 . >> fl [C 

0) "^ « a " 

> fc. o «^ 



'O 



JS 03 



03 _ OD 0} (U 
> to'O (U 03 



.a >■ 

a=« rt 

a^,^ 03 
'E '"' o 



^ a 33 



_ 6 °^ 

,-1 O m (B 

3 O) 4) G 

.■rt c p O 

P e3 p J- 

-<J r- ^ °3 

i^-i ~; ^^ G 



a«i 



5 Is 

go c: 

03 o "^ 
m (-^ S-t 

* -s^ 2 

<D 0- C 

^ 03 

O S 



t^ CD t^ . 1^ . lO 










<M . 00 


o 


. CO CO r^ 


^ . . 












• (TO • C^ 


o 


• C CO OJ 


CO 


00 . 00 00 .00 . T) oo 


T3 


tS 


TSTS 


TS TS 00 . '^ 00 


oCTS . oOOO t^ 


CO . . 


I—I .— 1 1— 1 1— 1 .1—1 


, 




, 




.1—1 .1—1 


I— 1 


r-l i-l 1-1 


T— 1 


«i « 


' ' 


•""• 


^-1 , — 1 


'^ 


Cl 


V: 


■" • si,^ 


a, • • 


-- Oi CO . . 






1—1 CO 


lO 


(M CO in> t^ 


a> 


1— Tji a> o 


(M lO CO 


• ■ (M Ol ■ 00 






O Oi 


00 


0-; Oi lO CO 


CO 


lO 1^ CO -tti 


c^ r^ t^ 


. . CO CO . .00 . . 


^ 




r-i^ 


r^ 


. l^ CO l^ t^ 


I^ 


. t^ t^ t- r^ 


r- t^ 00 








I— 1 ■— 1 


>— 1 


I— 1 1— 1 1— 1 1— 1 


I— 1 


1-1 rH 1— 1—1 


I— 1 1— 1 ^^ 


« V) 


• 


• 


e e 




« 


e 


e «i' 


>» ^i d 


Maryville 
Neuse 

Gravelly Run 
Henrico 
West'n Branch 
Black Water 
White Plains 
Deep River 
Piney Woods 














aj 




as 


a> 


. 3 
a; 

• ^3 






"a; 


• aj a; Jio 


CD --^ ^ 

S a; o3 


> 


;-i 


• 03 


? 




O 




^H a; 3 
O *:; cr 

03 i^si 
13 «« 


3 

01 


3 


• fe 




• 2 3. S on 


a 


aj a; o3 > 
• 3 3-^3 C 




o3 

o 


•iz; 


. ^ 53 03 3 


03 


. 03 o3 <U c3 

OQOO 


opS 


>> 


fl) 




a 












^H c3 o3 <D 






a> 




^ 








11 >'Z 






^3 








ri4 Of 


0) 

> 


rv* aj 0) o o)^^ a; 

« 3 ^ c, Es ^ -c & -S 




a) 


03 


o3 C3 p-i CD (B "^ 


b 


Lost Cre 
Westerr 
Bush Ri 
Upper 
Eastern 


.«s 


3 


-I-' 


a* T 


4-1 


^j OJ -M tt, - 


0- 


a> a2 


aj 




ts t* 




Wes 
Low 
Wes 
Fair 
Busl 


a 


^aj QQ 


^oo^oo,i^ajo3!-; 
Q Q iJ p ^J h-3 >^ IZ W fi4 


^ 


o aj 


o3 


t> 


PPW 



OO . . . .OOOO O .O _:0 .0„-0 .OOO .O .OO 

. .cScS^cS 03. cS-=S-o3i 03. ..tS. o3.. 

;z; Iz; >- > t> > ^ is ;2; !2; \^ t>ls cq:z;>^p2^ ;>|z!z^t>:z >!z;!g 



go odg 



O .O t> . .O .n 

c3 . ^- c3 03 . 03^ 



. gOo .o .oo 
> H !3 X > !z; > f?^ !z; 






'i'H'^iO 



;^ 



^5 



^i a; ■» 






00 ::j 



^^. 



^-^.r^ C,> 



3.SJ 5- 
O « g 



^ :- G<5 « 



f^pq^cqO) ft^ pqcq cq cq cq pq Oi eq 



p e a; <o <s § 
g S 3 S ?.. ;. 

e a c3 e s e 



« « a> 
S o o 

^ *-! »- 

*- J3 53 

Q CS ^ 

"^s ':: ts 
<o (u a) 
C)00 



^ 7Z ^ 



Si.; 



O 



Z"3 

o 



o 

o 



2 S 



<v B 



1^ 

o >- 



9 



- a 



^.--^ 






?* oi 



c2i 

00 

6.S 

03 O - g gj w 

tf ^ O eg ■'^ Q 



^o 



3 0) 



XJ fc.CO 

» Ot- --7 

_C .— 1 CO 

►- >^-^ CS W 

O _^ oj i> <1> 

*" 1^ 'O « 2 

Ti =* c 5t S 



-a2 

^-^ <u to 
*= *-' c 

2 . « 

I'll- I. 

0<- CO 



o 



O 



S K 



^o o 



ex 

>>c« 

^ p 






S o 
. o 

.^ CO O 

. o r o ^ 

a c ^K 

-^ (-r i m 

S ci ' — "* 
cr> 3 o 



. OS 

> »- 

GO 

'O ^ 

^ GO 



:a 

a^< 



C ^ v> 



0) o 






a^? 

« 5 o 

• G. 

■ O-H .- 

■.b ooo 

00 ^-^S 

ar« 

c4 o aj 

B5^ 







CO 



'0( 



oc 'O 'O 



© © to 
M— a 



OOOO 
I~- t^ t^ 



CO o o . lo 

05 CO <M O 

t^ t^ 00 . 00 



eS © 
— i © 



P^S 



c a 






Ph' 



CO 



^O 



':3 
C 
o 
o „ 

-G O (U 



OO O 



;^ 



;«« 



S225«S 

t^'OOEQQ 



Cm CO 



as 

© 3 
00 O* 






O 58 
COtE< 



0) to 
00 m 



O! 



-4-3 

a 
o 

o 



c5 c« cs o.=s a> 



^^ s 

c8 i; « 
h 0) "> 



i © !« 



0_:00.0 O. OO O 



O _•_•„• -OO 

c4 ej c4 «S . . 

_^__^CQM > Iz; Iz; 



_:00 

oj . . 

cc;z;z; 



CO 



O .OOqO . . OO O 



O ... .OO 

• rt o8 o8 ^ . . 






G CD fl 

«-> ti o 
ii o~ 
it: « 
a . tt 

S*- (JO 

3 beg 
o c o 

■-Go 

u © J; 
5S © O 



03 ^ — 

^- 0) >-.- ^ -G 

B3 .t-. w >- I. .kJ 
'13 G G c« O =S 

<u « a>.G •«; j3 
OOOOCiO 






^ St5 .« 






oo( 



J 






Otf 



o V. 3 a « <u 

o<::>oc:>aQ 



q§c^ 



/ 



y 



CO 3 



,:= o 



< 



o zi 



®^- a) jh c3 

C^ 2 t^ !U 

, "O OQ aj " 

o C^TO ■ 






SK^ 



M 



S « i> ^ .5 



n3 CIS 



O 








^ 


1^. 



<-> 




s 


3 


a 

lO 




m 
aj 


a; 




O 


, -. 


. 4> 






CJ 


d 


■1 fl 


^ 


^ 


0) 


03 


c3 


1^" 


'o 


4^ 

o 




S 


T 


1—1 ^ 


feO 


.« 


O 


go 3 o 


o 

> 




0) 


.-^ 


=*,,; 


* 


o 




a, 5 




o 

O 


i 





a 5 



So 



CO >. 

a><{ 



S !^ 



•^ fl " 
<x> o ^ 

a is 'a 



c5« 



o 



pq 



> 



i kH .'^ CD 



^'a -i - 

c3 " go 



o 



OJ ^ R 

6 >^ 



I ^" 
, c5 c>- aj • - 

6 a .O MH- 

O ^H s 05 

3 01)3 i a 
o <v ^ ^ ^ 

(JOhOCu, 



o 



'C w 



i^l 



s p. o. 
o ajpq: 



o • " 

O C5 "^ 






>i aj fl .^ 9 

c3 a> ^^ a; 0*" 

'O ^3 2 2 f^'*^--^ 

0) ej ^c« 3 c3 a. 03 



Jh fl^ 



Eh U 
OgrO 

c3 a> 

HO 



3 03 

.2 PM 



rt:t^ 



.S 3 

r-H Cj 

•Eg 
fag 



O O) « 

a) aj <u 
i- s-c >:; 

xooo 

cj (h a) a) 

t-i o3 cc ao 

S « o o 



"^ 3 
.O o 
o ajO 

OQQO 



• 


c. 1800 
1781 

c. 180G 


. CO . 


I— I 


'6 


'6 


1. d. 
1. d. 

1781 


ri 


1. d. 

p.1833 

1. d. 
1. d. 


1. d. 
1. d. 


CO 

I— ( 


O CO CM rp 
lO -*i 00 lO 
t^ t^C» l>- 

I— 1 .-1 1— 1 1-l 

«■ e 8 o 


. -*iCO 

loeo 

r-l I-H 


00 






lO O CO 
Tfi ■ lO 00 
00 . . I^ 00 

rM (—11-1 

e ■ ■ <i 




lO -^ «D . 
lOO lO 
t^OO t^ . 





, aj o 

0) =3 o 

^-^ S 



o3 



u a c^ ^ !-i X 
a> -tf ^ _rt -s -|j •■*-! 

p g: >H P3. g ^ fa 



W 



M 


u 


03 


i ) 












m 


cS 





fa 


t-l 



-ii! aj 
c3 &, 

>.p 



^3 


DO 


a) 

en 




I- 03 


»H 

a; 


-kS^ 


3 


-u 




i>«i-i 


-*-• 


I1 


.2 

fa 


cu 


Fair 
Upp 
Fair 


a) 



QJhO 

o o^ 



o 



.00 oo- o • o 0.000 00 ^.^. ^ -^ 

A . . . . o3 • c3 . . c3 =« J^ 5* C5 .• « • 



O .OOqOO . o 



;--; 3 • ^ ^ r-) 

.e3a;'3 ajoj ^^^«^ ^►5^J 



o 



Ci S 



PQ 



'W 



W E^ W ^ fa fe* 



9. S,s.s 

-3 ?» -^ .^ aQ 


^ ■ 


SCi.2 ^-d 


-o"^ 


5 ^ .2^ 3 


3 -IS 


'S'gSlI 


a) 3 


"S '2> ,>• (-1 




fa&^^-*.fa 


fak, 



tq 



';::5 5;i 



^ s © « 

e <» ^ ^ 



^ s o 

93 ?^ a) 

8 53 a) 

c« ^ tH 



a a 

i-Hqo HI 



o 0^ 5 
j-i »-, ^ 



a 

I •- C 
I— I oc ■- 



cc;^ 



I" 






cS — 

^ fe ^ 

CS "^ o 

a aj 



^ tf 



1 a 



c4 



O 

HI ^ 

'^ 'ft, 



0) 

a 

6 ■" 

r^ to 

— QJ 






o 



tf 



a> 



«( 



^ c 
c« ci i^ 



-^a 

MS 5 

>h6 






So 



P oj:<x 






3 - O 






- ._ o 
C O X 

^ ^ o 



a "m 






DO C 

M a 

22'S 

1— I O '^ 
CO 



o n 

« o 



— Co; 



^ Ol 

o a 



a^ 









lO 



O^S P5 



a^ cs a> 



r « C-c^ 



CO Q Oi 



oJ a^ 



a 1 ^ 



+> 00.0 
C> O A 
CO -'3 



> CO 






® s 






><^ 

a « 

Wo 



« 



o) G G -a "-^ 

i: .2 .2 "Sis 

3 ^H iH '^^ O 

OPt<EtiEco 



a cd 
SO- 






ft 






ca 



U — ^ "^ O) 

OJ c a c--^ 

^.2.2 a; g 
ft C t- <i> ►-^ 



s® = 



o 






.ooo . 

e3 . . . 03 



o 



&f2 
a 



05 CO o 
1^ 00 I^ 



50 

a 



ft 



G a if 

^ a OJ 



oS 
C»5 




fc 




a; 


ol 3 


55 


OQO 



<A <A 

a a 



a a.S 
o o c« 









01 



O 
TO 



. OO Q 



;o 



a Gj 
^- ^ « rt 



o oo . o o . 



«j u o 

(m o b 

3 t«a 
« a o 



08 & o 

a, g 



^i 
^ 



Cb &5 



03 "^ 

a ^ 

h 

Id <u 

Kfe] 






e O <S r; * •< 



ft 
'o 



2* a* 
K a^ 

CCCQ ^ 



s 

I 






^ s 



o 
c 

a 



00 

I-H 

-Si 

00 






C3 
03 

to 



W 



o 



,-3 C^ O 

a 

03 



03^ • "S' 
fl c3 C ti •- 



^ 6 






^ PI 
pq w , 
to -5 

03O 






i:tj<3P-i 



. o *- Q 

^ 03 0. 

o=« a 

00 H •- 

'-'So 

•"^^ 

r^ CO a> 

•w* o s-i 

P-O 



Efa 

. 0) 
•« to 

a 2 



o .- 

So 

-^ b 

00 *;J 



00 oorh 



00 






o 
o 

o 
m . 

C dj 

XI . 
O Pi 

^a 



go 



t^." o 



M 



O 

03 
O 



Ml 
fl 
O 
►J 

o 
Its 

03 
<V 

a 






^a3|l^§^^ 

-,^•:i c^ te»^ m U 



QD 03 






H 

"cocQ^ 
CO ^ '->^ 

Oi V" ^ 08 

Sr •!::> 3 3 

^ O tn 

;i5 i> > a ^ 

2 a> • sh • 
• o . 4>0 

f^wa^.s 

a. tc o !r! . f^ 
r (D ^- TS W M 



ooTi 00 



■T? 00 'O 



00 'd 



^ 



O 

.9 

-♦^ 

s 



^ 



o 



o 
O 



0) 

c3 


o3 
u 


13 


cr 


a 


ca 


«j 


BO 


^ 


m 


a 





a> 


!h 


P? 


^ 


02 



So 

o <o 
mO 



(V a> (c 
> Oh a< 
"-00 

ID V a> 



O-^ J;^ 

~ 0) * 

« S S 
>, 03 a 



o (U a> a> 

Jh 0^ 0) <D 

^000 

S d ® fl 

.S O « 03 

CL,i-:iQO 



CI o- 

"J^ S « 2 

OO |co 

to r; o (1 

v-:!!gMo 



>^ ^ 





> 




^« 


on 




03 


«> 


Wl-JQ 



aj sh c3 (H 
-u as «:; ID 

^ Oh >i te 



> o a> 
MqO 

0) 10 OQ 
03 O O 



u 

SS3P3 

OQ 3 JO 

03 o 3 

Hc»P3 



0} 

»H > > _, 






a> 



60 ^ 



03 



to !>.2 C 

O « 03 O 



. o .0 

S3 . ci . 



c3 rt c3 ^ 



000 _; 



000 



0000 



oo_:0 

:z!zp3l25 



d .0.0 ....dgg , ddo dgdd cd .0 

. ^ .03. rtSoSrt -aio) oS .. .a)'- g) . • ."^ . • 

^^ * 

^ ptq * 

t . 1:: :,:. :«s £ III 11= ■ |t|| 

l3 §* § ^ k'»^ :~ e § § S -S .S .- •« -^ -^ -^ o o <:> 000^ 



a , ^ 

^ " 00 C 
M — " 



4) o) <n 
GO ^^3 



lO s 



O 
O 









a ■" 



1o 



So^S.S 



-;: o 



o 

^ 



^ ^ 4> 

-♦-» -*j ""^ 
* «^ ,^ 



(U o 



2C5 



,--Pi 



i3« 

. 00 o 









6C • a> o o 

** K^ ^ J^ 

<i' 0) ' — ^ • ■ 






5^ jO 



O ' 



" s- O C 
- C o3 



S > cu cq <1 P5 &;^ 



oo 00 ^ 'O i^ T3 "O 



fl^ Ljj QQ <i-, n . n g IJ 

^^^ 

CO CO . 

'-'^ C«5_i O • 

00~ t^~ 00 . ^ 



>>&*! a. I 
^- s o i, ^ 



6^ a 

^ C CO 

a ao 

O CS OJ 



CO t^ o 



050 
CO CO 
00 I>- 



■^ CO •<* 

0000 oo 



t^ CO 
O OS 
00 J— 



coco 



O I-H 05 
O I- uo 
t^ t^ l^ 



t^O O .-I 

I- l^ CO t- 



00 I^ !M 
C5 OS t^ 
t^ I^ CO 



_^00 00 ^— ^ 

"t;^ o i^ ~ 00 






p^s 



So 

o =* 



a 

?? c * 



Ml a 

g CD « 0) t^'C 



e3_, OJ 

§a • > 



iC» 



i^a 

COrS 



•o 



a 
• o 

. a 

' CO 



">- a 



a 2 

(D 3 



^■>2 G 






r; M i; b _5 ti '^ 



CD 03 



> o 



.2 a-S 

ti O 3 



X S S M '^ 
it cS Oi 01 rt 
P^ b m en ;-, 



'>i^ 






"2 i^ 

0)1-) « 

K^ OS O <1> 



> a 

«a 



a 03 
;0 



_. O) a> aj « a^ m 
a!ia'^'3''aooP 

CQ O J « hJ Q W ^S 



O 






r^O^ 






=^^ .o 



oo .o .ooo 

. . cS . oj . . . 

iz; !z; > ^ > Iz; tr. 15 



O 



. a -d ad . .> .d . . . .d 

o3 <u o3 • o - c3 ^t^* o8 • 03 o8 OS oS • 



OO .O .OOO 



= -Sd 
♦J »- o 
a) p-r^ 

u a; b 

d o o 



- •^2■ 









■2 5 £ S . s: 



a 
-5^ 



s s s 

- ~ e 






0) <v> ■» 
3 S S 



s?^ia:^;:a ;^55*^;^;^j2;!<;^ ;^ 



0) 



«a 



00 a 



o 



O 



t^ 



S-2^ -2 

° m oo ^ o 

o --.a ^ tj o 

^« ^ a ^ ^ 
: .§^|-ao 



= ^^ 



. ^3 



o 



... S-1 



OO 

s o 



3 lO 



O o^ 



> 

<B O 
p "3 
O) J; 

cS . 

a.-: 
:ga< 

Too- 

o 

o 



-fl J:;^ b£0 ao O g U ^ 



>>.^2 

M^ a 2 

j^ CS ci 0) 
03 " o • 

<u o a ^ 

m 03 to 3 

c- 2 o o-^ 

OQ p, rt ,i1 ,0 «3 



« 2 o-g 



I W)0?' 



Q- to Oj CO g: Oh Pq O 






O) S3 <^ 
° ^' d ^ 

a^.^a 
S o ■■■^ 

. r^5 - 

!=1 '=' rt fl 

■=> i:; a S 

00 O .S ci3 



s> 

.6« 
o 1-1 a, 

rfl OQ O 

g a a p. 

CO . 

risl 05 >-l > 

O • . . 

tXi O O rt 

OO 7- 

"2 ^ ja 6 

3^ P-O 

OQ O O 0) 

. 'O 'O ^ 






'S to oj 
c3 % a ^ 



03 
O 
m 

EH 

o 



• OQ 



03 

., «a a 

03 1— I jQ . 

« ..150 
«^^o .- 

aj'=^ 03 ea B 

CO (!ri JrTl 



aj'^ 03 e3 3 

00 . lo 

"5 o • 

t^ . CO 'O 



'O 00 'O 



. lO 



'^'tJ t>. 



0) . ^ . .^ ^, 



IQOIM 
.00 t^ 



lOO 


■<ti o lo . 


— 1 1^ -<j< 


CO 00 


l^O lO 


05C5 C2 


t^ t^ 


C^ 1^ t^ . 


t^ t^ r^ 



CO <M CO 00 

CO O^ o^ c^ 

I-H I— I I— ( i-H 

o e e 



0) 



£) 






trt 



a) > 
cja to 



a) c^ 

_tH g a; 

O 'S aj 

J" "So 
' 9 S ►^ 



^ 



o 



00 

01 W) 

• > a 

• 2'^ 

• OoQ 

a)—. 



(» 



OS 



OQ fe :?; cc !z; O O - PhW 



.- o) OI.5 

^ fl O Sh 
CO 0-1 Ph CO 



60 

.s 

O O Q, 

o o*^ 
eS 03 o 



^ >'0 



a ^ <o 

aj CB ' — ! 
-O «'•'=! 



C £3 > -"2 > 



® O (H 

!z;OE^ 



© 55 as 

c3 '^ ° 

& fe & 

a) 0) o) 



ca c3 



> > 



^fe 



.^ aTa^ 
- aj"j: 



P3 



a 

H t< aj ^ 

Cl m 0> &i 00 ^ 

o 03 J a- 3 o 



c3 ^ 
^OQ 



Cd fcH P Si 

o> Si <i^ 

S" 00 -J^ to 

«^ 0> ^ 01 



fl C r- 
Sh ^ *^ 

2 2 ® 



s P § s g • ■ • 

<i^<500C000 



fSi . . . 

t)5 eH a> 



-3^0 
o <s o — 

(11 r>N C11 *-• 



O) 
. bC - 

.12 7; 00 



PhCsCiS CuP-iP-^ <^ 



d 2 '^ 
^PQ^4 



006 


dd^rcJodd.-^ . 

. . 03 . . . .ja eS 

!z; 12; CQ iz; ^ Iz; !z; cu > 


d ^dd 


'z 'z \i ^' 




PQ 




N. c. 
N.C. 
Tenn. 


d >d gdd . . 


S. C. 
Va. 
S. C. 
N.C. 


N. C. 

s. c. 

N.C. 
N.C. 




^ 
^ 


dcjd 




. . . 


. ^ . 


.... 






. 


• -« • 



>'9 -« 
o §»«> 

^ ts ^ 



a , — 

fe CO 

1— ~-'a> 



a 


1--"+^ 


-Q fl 


bb 


ss 


>-i 


o a 



a-" 



c 



00 — 
CJ OD 



'•2 -S 

15 m 



,- =^ o ^ 



9) 
6C, 



<c 



-Q CO 



' GO'S ^^ 

4J '~' ir" Qj fc. )^ 

«^f^ " o 2J 



.Pi ■ ^ 

*- /IS ^ 
^— — • CO 

^ t. •- 

gn^a 

»- J- c3 



O 

c o 

.-^ 

. '♦^ OD 
^* (U -^ 

"£^ 

6 d ^ 

UO . 

— ^ c 
o £.«• 

^. w ._ 

°e5 6 
00^ g 



ffi oil 



a <" xi 



2 ^ 



O 6: a o 

O Or-. "^ 



a M 

& .> ffi O o 
• S • . _ ■ 

a: I— I ii_( •" to 

aS ^■'- 

3: r^ 



SS2 



o^S^o 



c >- ^^ J:^' 
5i o c <= 

r" ts c 00 c 
(1; aj ci c <s 



O 



O rtj 

O c . 

r- .- O 

oO >< 
5 o 2 






^ c 00 



00 CO 'O t^ 00 



^§^ 

'5'r o 

a= s 

C5 ci O 
^ CM ^ 



B a 

00 

c 



. lO — • 
. 00 00 



. O ^ lO CO -t" O (M 



COiO 

1.00 

t^ CO 



CO W -r ':»< 

O C5 o >o 
t^ CO CO l^ 



CO CO t^ o ^^ 

Oi >— I CO CO o 

, t^ 00 CO l^ CO 

,— I I— . 1— . I—I >— ( 

■ e e e 



' C3 o 01 o: Oi i~ r^ 
, i;c CO i^ t^ CO 1^ CD 



■o' e 




O) 






O 






C3— . 

rH a. 
.2 o 



5 >-i<i 



Ij ^ *^ Q^ 



> > o s- aj C i^ 

-^ -= ^ ^ 2 fe S 
CO 00 i; (I c i> <i> 



^ t, c 









c § ^ 
c p a) 



a 2 
too* 



.S|a 

O C'-r 

B . t« 



u ai i: 

« 4) o 



^ 



C X 



Wfe 



^^ 



Is 



S3 S3 I I Ja, 

^^ 20 «e 2 ^, Si ^^ a ^s 



Yearly 
Meet- 
ing. 


"3 




. OS 


dddd 


ddddddd . . .d_::l . 


52;!?r.:z!zi 


S?;5?;555s!z;:z;!2;>>>55c:cu> 


CO 




d 


d . 

. 03 


d .do 

. 03 . . 


r^rj^UO^^ . . .d . . . 



= a 



ti 


•< 


''-' ® 


.a 


^ M 


u 


u 


ot: 



P5 a; 



«tf 






^5 ^ I 



•o • • 



»^»'^'s'i;t;'3cjv>"»<a'< 



00 






00 



CO tH 



o 
'3 



5o . 

3 CO 
g 03 00 

3 =i d 



bJ3 






2 o 



O O Oi 

c * P <u 



i: o 



M o^ s 



PL| ^ it ^ 0) 



a 

CO 



o 
O 



^ 5 



f», 



cm 



L_j 00 c8 ^ " 



c4 



jls.a 

O "^ o 



^ ^ '^iS'c '-''^ 



^ .J 

m )-i g 



« CD tE 

aj 



O O 

t> o g s a 

CO O <l 



O."^ ^O •-1=1 



Sec . 

-1-1 w ^y >*-« |,*-j ^^ M f^ ^ 1-^ Sh flj O 

■-^Jtl oi'-^ t, O'rtesr: erg Sr"t fe 












m 



o o 



'S 2 ^ a ^ 

^ ^ fl r^ -*-' .-J 

•" ^ a; csJS w 

CO aj -C! (KQ -jH 

g 0) a) J;5 ..-H 
■^ . - o3 -tJ a> • 



Ci — Ol 

13 



P5 

-;r. ?» P o) O 

- d 

^ ^d 08 



05 lO Oi ■* CO ^+1 

— ■'^^—•CO- rHlOOOOS 

.'Oco'o'Ooo'o oooooot^ 



Si^ 



'O CO 



CO CO OS ■* CO . •* O Oi o 



CO CO 
CD Ci 



M 




■^ 


a >H fl 


• 01 




r-^ 


a; 


2f§|^ 




Q 


Pi 


« 




00 o 


<D bD 


Si 


^ 


^^"^^^ 


• o 'I 




d 


d 


.S.S o o te 

>-. ^ O c2 S^ 


• -§ 


o 

CO 


o 

CO 




•c^ffi 



<» CD « 

-'^ "oQ .T^ ■*± 
^ « ^ S 

I' a s 1=1 

Qdo20 



« 5« 

o ca P 
OQ QCQ 



MM 
a> a) 
a; 4) 

c3 03 






tL( 



.^ Oh 



•*-3 J-V«4H aj . 

t5: 



aj c3 



O) o) o) 

Oh 



C5 ►-< K^a'c3Ci>i'oei" 






Ph a 



03 0) d 

►^ « ap o 



> 



o 







o3 
> 


do . .d .d . 

. . 03 oj . :« . c3 

;?; fej !> >:?:;> Iz; > 


oooo 


o3 




d 


'5 

CO 




.d 


o3* 


> 


dd . .d .d . 


dd cd 


ol 

> 


do 

!^cd 


d 

!zi 


> • 


dd 


• • 














a. 







^ 



'T- tH 


-« 


» 


^t2 




K5 


►sg-d 


-«? 


-tf 








;= d 


S 


-* 


ja o 


JS 


o 


^GO 


</3 


(^ 



td ''3 ~-^ ~ • <« 
•^ •- ^ g g r; :S ^ 

Oh 0.-S -fe. S S S S 



>; 00 ^ ^ 

c- <v ^^ ~~i 






6^ 

00 *3 



Ps ^ E^ Es 



si 

'5' S 



^£ 

IB flj 

ID . 



hH S C 



>- > ^' 



i; cS 



t^ "—I 



a 

« 

is 









ijs 












O . 

a o 



X:^ 6 9:^r^ 






" C 3 ^ C 

C/J Hs O CO 



Wo 



!>coSco 



1^ >^hH 



a 
s § <^ 

-PW d 

<Ueo-'- 

^^ E^: 

=?^ >.= 






t ^ s 

to <U "T 



~ tc ^ r" 



bii r ^ o 



]_, c 



.-• "^ •"■ 

a^a 

O Or"? 

s «= 

^0-5 



=■ ajs 






• - . O 

6 00 



<5^ to C 
M — -Q 

-a A^ 

0) 00 

03 ^a 



rl o 



'CO 1^ 00 "O 



1.0 cc 
I O T. 
> CO t^ 



CO t-c<) 

^ «5 05 
00 00 1^ 



10 >-i CO CO 
C 01 01 C5 

00 l^ I^ t^ 



e o 



-a 

o 

c c 

<u rt 



CO c-i cc c -* c<» 

I— ' o c. ici cc o 

1^ CO I^ I- I^ t^ 



e 8 e V. s o 



^ r^ o CO CO 

1-1 I-H ^ 4) ,-1 ^ 

• • . . O - . 

o c «J <i w 






■^^?? 



(CS 



t^'*- 






ffi H 'k^. g^ 



^- P-( 
c . 

WS 



(U c <K 



tfl 



^. .S *»- "'-I 

<D 03 O O 

• -r o P^ 00 °° 

Ph y ■ — ■ 






3 O aj t. 



o 2 



2 c 



^ 



S >-< 

•- « ^. ^ 
03 o *> o 



>H era >-c Qj ^- (I 

ir a; '^ OJ t*^ I^ 
^^ Ok. ca c 



4).-. 



"■^ '"' ^ 



C.S CD 
-' i_i -< iZ~i" ^ -' i" C 0* — 
>H ^ CQ p >^ CQ PQ ^ OfapQ 



C ci g g 



"rt o3 I5 
03 



^^- 



00 . 
. . 08 



^•00 . 
(S • • « 



.0 .00 . 



oo^j .000 



;5 55 pa 55 



00 . 



.00 . 
03 . . 03 



c6 cfi g8 ■ 08 



55 H CO > !z; C5 O 



00 . . 

. . 08 oS 



SCO 

** *< flj 






a 



4> V» 

I- . ►, 00 

01 ^ a>-. 



s: tr t: ;=: C Bt 



• • • S • V ^^^ 
S « S S; 

. . . CfjC f;^:) 

t: "^ '^ !S !^ J* 



(1 cS c< 00 

fl o o.g> 



APPENDIX IV. 

Bibliography. 



1/ 



The sources for the history of Southern Quakerism are 
abundant and of the most trustworthy kind. This study 
has been based almost exclusively on original sources; 
where no authorities for statements are given, it will be 
understood that they are based on the manuscripts; these 
authorities have been quoted literally as far as possible. 
Secondary authorities have been used for the purpose of 
explanation and illustration. These sources can be divided 
into three classes, and while perhaps the followi. "^ list is 
not exhaustive, it represents the printed material titdt has 
been of actual service in the preparation of the present mono- 
graph, and presents a practically complete list of the manu- 
script records of the Society in these States so far as I have 
been able to discover them. 

I. — Original Manuscript Sources. 

1. Philadelphia Yearly Meeting : 

Yearly Meeting Minutes, about 1683-1710. 
Charleston Monthly Meeting Minutes, 1718-86. 

There is a break in the Charleston records, i737-53> with 
several other lesser ones. 

2. Baltimore Yearly Meeting : 

Yearly Meeting Minutes, 1866-85 (printed). 
Alexandria Monthly Meeting Register, 1805-51. 
Crooked Run Monthly Meeting Register, 1 784-1807. 
Fairfax Monthly Meeting Minutes, 1 749-1844. 
Goose Creek (northern) Monthly Meeting Register, 
1 786- 1 868. 



346 Southern Quakers and Slavery. 

Hopewell Monthly Meeting Minutes, 1759-1845; ex- 
tracts, 1748. 
Nottingham Alonthly Meeting Minutes, 1764-97. 

These monthly meetings, with the exception of the last named, 
lay in Virginia and were transferred by Philadelphia to Balti- 
more Yearly Meeting in 1789. In the division in 1828 these 
records fell to the Hicksite Friends, and are kept in their fire- 
^ proof vault in Park Avenue Meeting House, Baltimore. Through 

the loving zeal of Kirk Brown, such volumes as required it were 
rebound, properly labeled and shelved, and a catalogue gives 
the location of all the records in the vault. An exhaustive 
index to the contents of all the volumes in the vault is now in 
preparation by Mr. Brown. As far as the preservation and care 
of these volumes go nothing more is to be desired. 

3. Virginia Yearly Meeting: 

Book of Records of the Lower Virginia Meetings, 
1 673-1 709. 

This contains the earliest records, of any and all kinds, of 
Virginia Friends. It deals principally with marriages, births 
and deaths, and was begun by motion of George Fox. 

Yearly Meeting Minutes, 1702-1836, 1838-43; Wo- 
men, 1763-1825. 

These volumes are imperfect. There is no trace of the 
records for 1724-37; those from 1737-68 are pretty generally 
preserved; those from 1768-91 are made up of material sent in 
the form of extracts from the Yearly to the quarterly and 
monthly meetings. Some of these parts were made up after 
1800, tlie spelling was frequently modernized and other similar 
changes made. After 1791 the records have been preserved. 

Yearly Meeting Correspondence, 1796- 1828, 1829- 
40; Records of Ministers and Elders, 1758-74, 
1824-53; Records of Meeting for Sufferings 
(Wainoak), 181 1-25, (Gravelly Run) 1822-35. 

Half Yearly Meeting Minutes of ^Ministers and El- 
ders, 1854-60. 

Quarterly Meeting Minutes: 

Upper, 1783-1818, 1839-43; Women, 1 786-1817, 
1837-43; Western, 1797-181 7. 



Bibliography. 347 

Monthly Meeting Minutes: 
Blackvvater, 1 796-1 807. 
Camp Creek Register, 1739-73- 
Cedar Creek, 1739-73. 1789-91, 1791-92, i 797-98, 

181 1-33, 1834-68. 
Cedar Creek and Caroline County, 1775-89; same as 

Cedar Creek. 
Goose Creek (southern), 1794-1814; Women, 1794- 

1814; Register, 1795-1814. 
Gravelly Run, 1819-32; Register, 1760-1810. 
Isle of Wight, 1767-71. 
Pagan Creek, 1738-74. 
South River, 1757-97, 1797-1823, 1820-25, 1832-37, 

1836-39; Women, 1763- 1805, 1805-20; Register, 

1757-1858. 
Upper (Gravelly Run and Burleigh), 1800-32. 
Wainoak, 1807-26, 1828-30, 1830-33, 1833-35; Wo- 
men, 1830-34. 
Western Branch (Isle of Wight), 1806-33. 
White Oak Swamp, including Register, 1780-81; 

Minutes, 1781-1805, 1805-24; Women, 1762-1807; 

Register, 1 792-1837. 

To this list we must add various miscellaneous volumes 
that have been of service: 

Records of Cedar Creek School Company, 1791-99. 
Memoir and Manuscript Writings of Barnaby Nixon 

(1 752-1807). 
Manuscript Writings of Hardy Crew. 
, Letter Book of Robert Pleasants (d. 1802), covering 

the period 1754-97. 
Virginia Discipline, 1758. 
Minutes of Committee to Defend Freedom of People 

of Color, 1846-53. 

All of the above volumes, together with a few others that are 
of little importance, are in the care of Baltimore Yearly Meet- 
ing of (Orthodo.x) Friends. They have a Records Committee 



348 Southern Quakers and Slavery. 

of which John C. Thomas is chairman. The records are 
deposited in the vaults of the Mercantile Safe Deposit and Trust 
Company of Baltimore. Many of the records of Virginia Yearly 
Meeting have been destroyed by fire or lost through neglect. 
Many of the volumes that survive need rebinding ; some should 
be copied, and the whole should be so arranged and indexed that 
use of them may be easier and their preservation better assured. 

Besides the above records in possession of Baltimore 
Friends, other Virginia manuscripts have been of service 
as follows: 

Henrico Monthly Meeting Minutes, 1692-1746. 

This volume is owned by Robert A. Brock, Esq., of Rich- 
mond, Va., and was kindly placed by him at the disposal of the 
author. 

Records of the General Court, Orders, etc., of Vir- 
ginia, 1657-78 (or later). 

These records are preserved only in the extracts and notes 
made from the originals, now destroyed by fire, by the late Con- 
way Robinson, and are now among his MSS. which are in pos- 
session of the Virginia Historical Society. They were made 
available for this work through the courtesy of Philip A. Bruce, 
Esq., the accomplished Secretary of the Society. 

Records of the General Court, Orders, etc. 

Covers the period immediately succeeding the Conway MSS.; 
also in Virginia Historical Society Library. 

Court Records of Norfolk and Princess Ann Coun- 
ties in the Seventeenth Century. 

Extracts kindly made for me by John W. H. Porter, Esq., 
and Edward W. James, Esq. 

4. North Carolina Yearly Meeting : 

Yearly Meeting Minutes, 1708-93, 1794-1837, 1835- 
46, 1846 to date. 

The Minutes for 1805-12, inclusive, have been lost. Since 
1845 these Minutes have been printed annually. 

Minutes of the Meeting for Sufferings, 1757-1803, 

1820-25, 1824-56. 
Minutes of Standing Committee, 1 757-1814, 1817-23. 



Bibliography. 349 

Record of the Epistles, Letters, and Other Docu- 
ments Directed and Belonging to the Meeting for 
Sufferings of North Carolina Yearly Meeting, 
1826-36. 

Quarterly Meeting Minutes: 

Contentnea, 1793-1823, 1823-30, 1838-40; Women, 

1851-75- 
Deep River, 1819-70; Women, 1819-89. 
New Garden, 1788- 1830, 1830-88. 
Perquimans, 1708-92 (same as Eastern). 
Western, 1 759-1866. 
Westfield, 1803-32; Women, 1804-32. 

Monthly Meeting Minutes: 

Bush River (S. C), 1772-83, 1783-91, 1 792-1808, 

1790-95; Register, 1797-1807 (3 vols.). 
Cane Creek, 1751-97, 1797-1837. 
Contentnea (Falling Creek, 1772), 1774-1817, 1790- 

95, 1814-43; Women, 1817-33. 
Core Sound, 1733-91, 1791-1840; Women, 1774-181D, 

1 784- 1 804. 
Deep River, 1778-1808, 1808-37, 1837-71; Women, 

1 778- 1 843, 1843-92; Register, 1770. 
Dover, Women, 1815-77. 

Hopewell, 1824-49; Women, 1824-48; Register, 1824. 
• Jack Swamp, 1 794-1812. 

Mount Pleasant, Women, 1802-25. 

New Garden, 1754-75, 1775-82, 1783-1800, 1801-20, 

1820-31, 1831-46, 1847-70; Women, 1754-1823, 
1823-67; Register, 1 754-1 821, 1821-48. 
Pasquotank, Women, 1715-68, 1768-1841; Register, 

1809-50 (continued under Symons's Creek). 
Perquimans, 1681-1764 (notices some events that 

occurred in 1680 and has a Register of marriages 

and births); Register, c. 1677-1707; (continued 

under Wells's). 



350 i^outhern Quakers and Slavery. 

Piney Grove, S. C, 1802-15; Register. 

Piney Woods, 1 794-1802, 1802-30; Women, 1794- 

1836. 
Rich Square, 1760-99, 1799-1830, 1831-73. 
Spring, 1831-39 (all that I have seen). 
These records begin as early as 1793 at least. 

Springfield, 1791-1820, 1820-59, 1860-85 ! Women, 

1790-1850, 1850-86; Register. 
Sutton's Creek, 1794-1807, 1807-35 ; Women, 1794- 

1835 (continued under Piney Woods). 
Symons's Creek, 1803-37, 1837-54; Women, 1768- 

184 1, 1841-53 (continued under Piney Woods'). 
Wells's, 1764-94. (Grew out of the old Perquimans 

]\Ionthly Meeting; was divided in 1794, a new one 

being established at Sutton's Creek and the old 

one continued at Piney Woods.) 
Westfield, 1787-1823. 
Wrightsborough, Ga., 1773-93; Register. 

The fortunes of the records of this Yearly Meeting parallel 
those of Virginia. Many have perished through fire, neglect 
and decay, and this was made more possible by the large 
expanse of territory covered. These misfortunes awakened 
Friends to a partial realization of their value. They began the 
work of collecting, and the books gathered were stored in King 
Hall at Guilford College. This Hall was destroyed by fire, 
August 31, 1885. The records, some deeds and other papers 
were in the safe. The parchments were roasted beyond repair. 
The leather backs were baked and peeled from the records, and 
the edges of some were so charred that they crumbled at the 
slightest handling. This experience taught Friends a hard 
lesson. They have since erected a fire-proof vault on the 
campus of Guilford College, and have invited the lesser meet- 
ings to deposit their records there. Friends in North Carolina 
have not been careful enough of their history. They do not 
appreciate fully the great mass of invaluable material that there 
is in their records. They should insist that all unused record 
books be placed in the vault at Guilford College, and they 
should use all possible means to secure this end. Many of the 
volumes already there are very much in need of rebinding. 
Some must be copied soon or the action of fire and the decay of 



Bibliography. 351 

time will vender them entirely illegible. Copying has been 
begun with the South Carolina records, but they are being mod- 
ernized in spelling, etc., to suit the taste of the copyist, which 
should not be allowed. The whole should also be catalogued 
and systematically arranged on the shelves. The work of col- 
lecting these records was inaugurated by Alltn Jay, of Indiana. 

5. Other Manuscript Sources: 

Minutes of North Carolina Manumission Society, 

1815-35- 

This volume is now the property of the North Carolina Yearly 
Meeting. It was discovered a few years ago, after it had 
been forgotten for half a century, and was deposited by Addison 
Coffin. 

Journal of Isaac Hammer (i 769-1 835). 

This MS. is owned by North Carolina Yearly Meeting. 

Minutes of Monthly Meeting of Friends in Pasquo- 
tank, 1701-C. 60. 

This volume got into the hands of the late Governor Swain. 
It then passed into the office of the Secretary of State of North 
Carolina, and extracts were published from it by Col. Saunders 
in the Colonial Records of North Carolina, Vols. I. and II. It 
was in his office as late as 1890, whtn it was examined by the 
writer. Since the death of Col. Saunders it has disappeared. 

Archdale Papers. Papers relating to y® Province of 
Carolina:/ principally whilst John Archdale Esq: 
was/ Governour & Comander in chief of y^ Prov- 
ince./ and 1694, 1695, &^c. with a Draught of yV 
Town, Mapps of y*^ Forts, Rivers, Coasts, &c. 

This folio volume is composed of contemporary documents, 
many of them in the handwriting of Archdale, and deals princi- 
pally with his administration in South Carolina. Its general 
character is like that of his Descriptio7i of Carolina, but is more 
definite than that wandering performance. The volume was sold 
at Mr. Granger's auction, Jan. 25, 1732(33). It was once the 
property of the Chevalier U'Eon, and has recently come into the 
possession of Charles Roberts, Esq., of Philadelphia, who very 
kindly placed it at the disposal of the author. 

Account of the State of Friends in Virginia in 1727, 
by Robert Jordan. 

This account is mentioned and quoted by Robert Pleasants in 
his Letter Book. The original itself has disappeared. 



352 Southern Quakers and Slavery. 

A Journal of part of tlie Life, travails and labours of 
that faithful Servant, And Minister of the Gospel, 
Thomas Nicholson (c. 171 5-1780). 

This MS. is owned by Philadelphia V'early Meeting, and was 
placed at the service of the author by Mr. George J. Scatter- 
good. Nicholson was a prominent Carolina Quaker, see ati/e, 
pp. 141, 142. 

Some Account of the Family of the Kirks, by Rachel 

Price (nee Kirk) (1763-1841). 

This MS. was kindly furnislied me by Mr. Gilbert Cope, of 
West Chester, Pa. It deals with the settlement in Georgia. 

Historical Sketch of the origin, investment and con- 
tinuance of the Trust of the Estate of Friends in 
Charleston, S. C, with sundry facts and circum- 
stances relating thereto down to 1826 [continued 
to 1883] by a Committee of the Meeting for Suf- 
ferings. 

This MS. is owned by Philadelphia Yearly Meeting. 

II. — Original Printed Sources. 

The second class of materials consists of printed matter. 
This includes: (i) The journals, memoirs and other accounts 
of Quaker missionaries who visited these States; (2) Laws 
of the several States. 

I . Joiunials, Memoirs, &c. : 

The largest collection of Quaker literature in a public library 
with Avhich the writer is acquainted is that of The Friends' His- 
torical Library of Swarthmore College, Pa. A catalogue of 
this collection was printed in 1893. Many Quaker books of 
value are to be found in the Pennsylvania Historical Society 
Library. The libraries of both Orthodox and Hicksite Friends 
of Philadelphia, the library in the Eutaw Street Meeting House, 
and that in the Park Avenue Meeting House, Baltimore, and 
that of Guilford College, N. C, have all been of service. 
Of private libraries, it is probable that no finer collection of 
Quaker books exists than that of Charles Roberts, Esq., of 
Philadelphia. 



Bibliography. 353 

Archdale, John. Description of Carolina. London, 
1707. 

Reprinted in Carroll's Historical Collectiofis of South Caro- 
lina. New York, 1836. 
Backhouse, Hannah Chapman (1787-1850). Extracts 

from her Journal and Letters. [London], 1858. 

Visited the South in 1834. 

Boweter John (c. 1629-1704). Journal. London, 
1705- 

Contains a list of American places visited. 

Bownas, Samuel (1676-1753). Life. London, 1846. 

16°. 
Brayton, Patience (i 733-1 794)- Life. New York, 
1801. 12°. 

Visited the South 1771-72. 

Brookes, Edward (i 758-1 827). Life and Journal, in 
Friends Miscellany, XII., 1839. 12°. 

Visited North Carolina 18 13. 

Burnyeat, John (1631-1690). The Truth Exalted in 
the Writings of. London, 1691. 8°. 

Cadwallader, Priscilla (i 786-1859). Memoirs. Phil- 
adelphia, 1864. 16°. 

Born in North Carolina; visited Virginia 1823 and 1850. 

Chalkley, Thomas (1675-1741). Works. Rnladel- 
phia, 1790. 8°. 

Churchman, John (1705-1777)- Account of. Lon- 
don, 1780. 8°. 

Coffin, Elijah (1798-1862). Life, with a Reminis- 
cence by his son, Charles F. Coffin. N. p. [Cincin- 
nati?], 1863. 8°. 

Born in North Carolina ; migrated to the West. 

Coffin, Levi (1798-1877). Reminiscences. Cincin- 
nati, 1876. Second edition, 1880. 

Born in North Carolina ; migrated to the West. 



354 Southern Quakers and Slavery. 

Collins, Elizabeth (i 755-1831). Memoirs. Philadel- 
phia, 1859. 16°. 
Visited Virginia in 1799. 

Comly, John (i 773-1850). Journal. Philadelphia, 
1853- "8°. 

Visited the South in 1829. 

Dickinson, James (1659-1741). Life, in Friends' 
Libraiy, Vol. XII. Philadelphia, 1848. 8°. 

Edmundson, William (1627-17 12). Journal. Lon- 
don, 1774. 8°. 

Ellis, William (1658-1709) and Alice. Life and Cor- 
respondence, edited by James Backhouse. Phila- 
delphia, 1850. 12°. 

Evans, Joshua (i 731-1798). Journal, in Friends' 
Miscellany, \o\. X. 1837. 12°. 

Evans, W'illiam (i 787-1867). Journal. Philadelphia, 
1870. 8°. 

Visited the South 1830 and 1841. 

Ferris, Benjamin (1740-1771). Journal, in Friends 

Miscellany, Vol. XII. 1839. 12°. 
Ferris, David (i 707-1 798). Memoirs. Philadelphia, 

1825. 12°. 

Visited the South in 1772. 

Forster, William (1784-1854). Memoirs. London, 
1865. 8°. 2 vols. 

Visited the South 1820 and 1824. 

Fothergill, John (1676-1744). Account of, in Friends 

Library, Vol. XIII. Philadelphia, 1849. 8°. 
Fothergill, Samuel (1715-1772), M. D. Memoirs and 

Letters. New York, 1844. 8°. 
Fox, George (1624-1691). Epistles. Philadelphia, 

1858. 16°. 

Journal. New York, 1800. 8°. 2 vols. 

Friends' Library. Philadelphia, 1837-1850. 8°. 14 

vols. 

A reprint of many of the old journals and of very great value. 



Bibliography. 355 

Friends' Miscellany. Philadelphia. 12°. c. 1830 
c. 1840. 12 vols. 

A serial publication which contains a number of the shorter 
papers dealing with the history of Southern Friends and with 
visits of traveling Friends among them. 

Gough, James (1712-1780). Memoirs. Philadel- 
phia, 1783. 12°. 

Grellet, Stephen (1773-1855). Memoirs. Philadel- 
phia, i860. 8°. 2 vols. 

Visited the South 1800, 1809, 1824. 

Griffith, John (1713-1776). Journal. Philadelphia, 
1780. 8°. 

Gurney, Joseph John (1788- 1847). Memoirs. Phila- 
delphia [c. 1854]. 8°. 2 vols, in one. 

Harrison, Sarah (i 748-1812). Memoirs, in Friends' 
Miscellany, Vol. XL, 1838. 12°. 

Healey, Christopher (1773-1851). Memoir. Phila- 
delphia, 1886. 16° 

Visited the South 1818. 

Hicks, Elias (i 748-1830). Journal. New York, 
1832. 8°. 

Visited the South 1797 and 181 3. 

Hoag, Joseph (b. 1762). Journal. London, 1862. 
12°. 

Visited the South 1812, 1816 and 1823. 

Holme, Benjamin (1682-1749). Epistles and Works. 
London, 1753. 12°. 

Visited the South in 1717. 

Hoover, David. Memoir, edited by Isaac H. Julian. 
Richmond, Ind., 1857. 8°. 

Born in North Carolina ; migrated to the West. 

Hoskins, Jane (b. 1694). Life, in Friends' Library, 

Vol. I. Philadelphia, 1837. 8°. 
Hull, Henry (1765-1834). Memoir. Philadelphia, 

1864. 12°. 

Visited the South in 1799. 



356 Southern Quakers and Slavery. 

Hunt, Nathan (1758-1853). Brief Memoir, from his 
Journals and Letters. Philadelphia, 1858. 12°. 

Bom and lived in North Carolina. 

Hunt, William (1733-1772). Memoirs, chiefly from 
his Journals and Letters. Philadelphia, 1858. 12°. 

Boni in Pennsylvania or Maryland ; lived in North Carolina; 
died in England. This volume is bound with the one devoted 
to Nathan Hunt, his son. 

Janney, Samuel McPherson (1801-1880). Memoirs. 
Philadelphia, 1881. 

Jordan, Richard (i 756-1826). Journal, in Friends' 
Library, Vol. XHL Philadelphia, 1849. 8°. 

Judge, Hugh (c. 1 750-1 834). Memoirs and Journal. 
Byberry, 1841. 12°. 

Kersey, Jesse (1768- 1845). Narrative of. Philadel- 
phia, 1852. 12°. 

Visited the South 1795. 

Kirk, Elisha (1757-1789). Memoirs, in Friends' 

Miscellany, Vol. VL, 1834. 12°. 
Lewis, Enoch (b. 1776). Memoir, by Joseph J. Lewis. 

West Chester, Pa., 1882. 8°. 

Visited the South 1814 and 1849. 

Lundy, Benjamin (1789-1839). Life, Travels and 
Opinions. Philadelphia, 1847. 12°. 

Compiled by Thomas Earle. 

Memorials of deceased Friends. Philadelphia, 1787. 
8°. 

Morris, Susannah (1682-1755). Journal, in Friends 
Miscellany, Vol. VI. Philadelphia, 1834. 12°. 

Neale, Samuel (i 729-1 792) and Mary Neale (1717- 
1757). formerly Mary Peisley. Lives. Philadel- 
phia, i860. 12°. 

Samuel visited the South 1770-71 ; Mary 1753. 

Nixon, Bamaby (1752-1807). Memoirs, in Friends' 
Miscellany, Vol. XH. Philadelphia, 1839. 12°. 



Bibliography. 357 

Osborn, Charles (1775- 1850). Journal. Cincinnati, 
1854- 8^ 

Bom in North Carolina ; removed to the West. 

Phillips, Catherine (1727- 1794), formerly Peyton. 
Memoirs. London, 1797. 12°. 

Piety Promoted. Kendall's edition. 

Pumphrey, Stanley (1837-1881). Memories. Lon- 
don [c. 1882]. 16°. 

Reckitt, William (1706- 1769). Account of. Phila- 
delphia- 1783. 12°. 

Richardson, John (c. 1666-1753). Account of. Phila- 
delphia, 1783. 12°. 

Routh, Martha (i 743-181 7). Memoir, in Friends' 
Library, Vol. XIL Philadelphia, 1848. 8°. 

Savery, William (i 750-1804). Journal, in Friends' 
Library, Vol. L Philadelphia, 1837. 8°. 

Scattergood, Thomas (1748-1814). Memoirs, in 
Friends' Library, Vol. VIIL Philadelphia, 1844. 
8°. 

Scott, Job (i 751-1793). Journal. Mount Pleasant, 
Ohio, 1820. 12°. 

Sewel, William. History of the rise, increase and 
progress of the Christian people called Quakers. 
London, 1795 and 1835. 8°. 2 vols. 

This book was published early in the eighteenth century, and 
is practically an original authority for the period covered. 

Shillitoe, Thomas (i 754-1836). Life, in Friends' 
Library, Vol. IIL Philadelphia, 1839. 8°. 

Stabler, Edward (1769-1831). Memoir. Philadel- 
phia, 1846. 16°. 

Stanton, Daniel (i 708-1 768). Journal, in Friends' 
Library, Vol. XIL Philadelphia, 1848. 8°. 

Story, Thomas (c. 1662-1742). Journal. Newcastle- 
upon-Tyne, 1747. 4°- 

See also Life of Story by John Kendall, condensed from his 
Journal, London, 1786, 8°. 



358 Southern Quakers and Slavery. 

Sutcliff, Robert. Travels in some parts of North 
America, 1804, 1805, 1806. Philadelphia, 1812. 

I6^ 

Visited the South 1S04 and 1S05. 

Thomas, Abel (c. 1 737-1816). Memoir, in Friends' 
Library, Vol. XIII. Philadelphia, 1849. 8'. 

Wheeler, Daniel (1771-1840). Memoir. Philadel- 
phia \c. 1845]. 

Visited Virginia in 1839. 

Wigham, John (i 749-1 839). Memoirs. London, 
1842. 16'. 

Visited the South 1795-1797. 

Williams, William (1763-1824). Journal. Cincin- 
nati, 1828. 12°. 
Published also in Belfast, 1839, 12°. Williams was born in 

North Carolina and went to the West. 

Wilson, Thomas (d. 1725). Journal. London, 1784. 

16°. 
Woolman, John (1720-1772). Journal. London, 

1824. 8°. 
Yamall, Peter [^c. 175 5- 1798). Memoir, in Friends 

Miscellany, Vol. II., 1832. 12°. 

2. Laws of the States : 

Hening's Statutes at Large of Virginia. Richmond, 

Philadelphia and New York, 1819-1823. 8°. 13 

vols. 
Collection of Laws of Virginia, 1808, 
Collection of Acts of Virginia, 1814. 
Code of Virginia. Richmond, 1849. 8°. 
Swann's Revisal of the Laws of North Carolina. 

Newbern, 1752. 4°. 
Davis's Revisal of the Laws of North Carolina. 

Newbern, 1765. Sm. 4°. 
Davis's Revisal of the Laws of North Carolina. 

Newbern, 1773. 4°. 



Bibliography. 359 

Iredell's Revisal of the Laws of North Carolina. 

Edenton, 1791. 4°. 
Martin's Revisal of the Laws of North Carolina. 

Newbem, 1804. Sm. 4°. 
Potter and Yancey's Revisal of the Laws of North 

Carolina. Raleigh, 182 1. 8°. 2 vols. 
Session Laws, 1785, 1803, 1830, 1832. 
Revised Statutes of North Carolina. Raleigh, 1837. 

8°. 2 vols. 

Revised by Frederick Nash, James Iredell and William H, 
Battle. 

Revised Code of North Carolina. Boston, 1855. 8". 

Revised by B. F. Moore and Asa Biggs. 

Statutes at Large of South Carolina. Columbia, 
1836-1841. 8°. 10 vols. 

Revision begun by Thomas Cooper ; continued by D. J. Mc- 
Cord. 

Digest of the Laws of the State of Georgia. Savan- 
nah, 1802. Sm. 4°. 

By William H. Crawford. 

A Digest of the Laws of the State of Georgia, from 
its establishment as a British Province down to 
the year 1798 inclusive. Philadelphia, 1808. Sm. 
4°. 

By Robert and George Watkins. 

Digest of Statute Laws of Georgia. Athens, 1851. 
8°. 2 vols. 

By Thomas R. R. Cobb. 

Acts/ passed by the/ General Assembly/ of the/ 
Colony of Georgia,/ 1755 to 1774./ Now first 
printed./ Wormsloe./ MDCCCLXXXI. 

III. — Secondary Authorities. 

Under this head are classed a number of papers that have 
been of service in illustrating and expanding original author- 
ities and in suggesting new lines of thought. 



360 Southern Quakers and Slavery. 

Applegarth, Albert Clayton. Quakers in Pennsyl- 
vania. Johns Hoi)kins University Studies hi His- 
tory and Political Science, Vol. X. Baltimore, 
1892. 8°. 

Book of Meetings of the Society of Friends in 
America. Columbus, O., 1884. 16°. 

Gives a list of the various meetings throughout America, 
together with the times they are held, but little trouble has been 
taken to fix the geographical location of these meetings. 

Bowden, James (d. 1887 act. 75). History' of the 
Society of Friends in America. London, 1850- 
1854. 8°. 2 vols. 

This work is of much merit and is the most extensive separ- 
ate study of American Quakerism. 

Bradley, Thomas (?). History of Quakers. London, 
1799. 12°. 2 vols. 

Published anonymously. 

Brock, Robert Alonzo. Prefatory note to the fourth 
charter of the Royal African Company. Collec- 
tions of Virgijiia Historical Society, Vol. VL 
Richmond, 1887. 8°. 

The Colonial Virginian. Reprinted from Vol. 

XIX. of Southern Historical Society Papers. 

Brown, Levi K. Account of the meetings of the 
Society of Friends within the limits of Baltimore 
Yearly Meeting (Hicksite). Philadelphia, 1875. 
16°. 

Cabell, Mrs. Julia Mayo. Sketches and Recollec- 
tions of Lynchburg. Richmond, 1858. 12°. 

Published anonymously. 

Cartland, Fernando G. Southern Heroes or the 
Friends in War Times. Cambridge, 1895. ^° ■ 

Coffin, Addison (1822 — ). Emigration from North 
Carolina. Guilford Collegian,No\. IV., 1891-92. 

Pioneer Days in Guilford County. Ibid.,No\. 

III., 1890-91. 

Mr. Coffin has a volume in preparation on his Life and 
Travels. 



Bibliography. 361 

Coffin, Charles ¥. Early Settlement of Friends in 

Indiana, Friends Review, Vol. IX., 1855-56, pp. 

506-508, 539-541, 553-554, 581-582, 619-620. 
Some facts relating to the early settlement of 

Friends in North Carolina, the emancipation of 

their slaves, &c. Ibid., Vol. XII., 1858-59, 532- 

534, 548-550. 
Cofifin, Elijah. Friends in North Carolina. Friends' 

Reviezv, Vol. XIV., 1860-61, 420-421, 453-454, 

470-472, 484-485, 500-501, 517-519, 531-533, 554- 

555, 565-567, 580-581, 613-615. 
Evans, Charles, M. D. Friends in the Seventeenth 

Century. Philadelphia, 1875. 8°. 

Chapters lo and 22 deal with the beginnings of Quakerism 
in th* South. 

Fothergill, Samuel. Essay on the Society of Friends. 

Gilpin, Thomas. Exiles in Virginia: with observa- 
tions on the conduct of the Society of Friends dur- 
ing the Revolutionary War. Philadelphia, 1848. 8°. 

Gough, John. History of the People called Quakers 
from their first rise to the present time. Dublin, 
1789-90. 8°. 4 vols. 

Volume 3, chapters 21 and 26 have some notices of the 
work of Edmundson. Robert Pleasants prepared an account of 
Virginia Friends and sent it to James Pemberton for these 
volumes. 

Hancock, Thomas. The Peculium; An endeavor to 
throw light on some of the causes of the decline of 
the Society of Friends. London, 1859. 16°. 

Harrison, Samuel A., M. D. Wenlock Christison 
and the early Friends in Talbot County, Md. Bal- 
timore, 1878. 8°. 

Hodgson, William. The Societ>^ of Friends in the 
Nineteenth Century: A historical view of the suc- 
cessive convulsions and schisms therein during 
that period. Philadelphia, 1876. 8°. 2 vols. 



302 f^oulhcrn (jKukers; and Slavery. 

Janney, Samuel McPherson. History of the Reli- 
gious Society of Friends. Philadelphia, 1 86 1-68. 
12°. 4 vols. 

Julian, George W. The rank of Charles Osbom as 
an anti-slaver}^ pioneer. Indianapolis, 1891. 8°. 

Mcllwaine, Henry Reid, Ph. D. The struggle of 
Protestant Dissenters for religious toleration in 
\'irginia. J- H. U. St2idies in Historical and 
Political Science. Baltimore, 1894. 8°. 

Macy, Obed. History of Nantucket Boston, 1835. 

Mendenhall, Nereus (1819-1893). History of New 
Garden Boarding School, in Gjiilford Collegian, 
Vol. H., 1889-90. 

Michner, Ezra. Retrospect of early Quakerism. 
Philadelphia, i860. 8°. 

O'Neall, John Belton. Annals of Newberr}% S. C. 
Charleston, 1859. 12°. 

Slavery and the Slave trade. Brief statement of the 
rise and progress of the testimony of the Religious 
Society' of Friends against slaver}' and the slave 
trade. Philadelphia, 1843. 12°. 

This contains some account of the proceedings witliin the 
limits of Virginia Yearly Meeting. 

Smith, Charles Lee. Histor}' of Education in North 

Carolina. Washington, 1888. 8°. 
Wasson, M. Annals of Pioneer Settlers on the 

White Water and its Tributaries. Richmond, Ind., 

1875. 8°. 

Published anonymously. 

Weeks, Stephen B. The religious development in 
the province of North Carolina. J. H. U. Studies 
in Historical and Political Science, Vol. X. Balti- 
more, 1892. 8°. 

Church and State in North Carolina. /did. 

Vol. XI. Baltimore, 1893. 8°. 

Young, Andrew W. History of Wayne County, In- 
di.-ina. Cincinnati, 1872. 8°. 



INDEX 



Abell, John, ment'd. 129. 
Abolition, position of Va. Q. on, 

216. 
Abolition Society in Va., 213; no. 

in 1827, 241n. 
Accomac Co., Q. in, 29, 52, 64. 
Accommodations, scarcity of, 92- 

9;;. 

Adams, Charles F., on fornica- 
tion in Mass., 132w. 

Adams family goes West, 272. 

Affirmation allowed, 191-193. See 
also Oath and Oath of allegi- 
ance. 

Africa, negroes sent to, 231, 233. 

African fund, object of, 228. 

Agriculture, work of Bal. Asso. 
for, 314. 

Akehurst, Daniel, deputy, 55; 
sketch, 65, Q6n.; travels in Va., 
68; ment'd, 33, 129, 134. 

Alamance, battle of, ment'd, 182. 

Alamance Co., N. C, Q. in, 70, 
101. 

Albemarle. Duke of, 9; share of 
Carolina ment'd, 55. 

Albemarle. See North Carolina. 

Albemarle Co., Va., Q. emigrate, 
293. 

Albertson fam. goes West, 275, 
277. 

Alexandria Boarding School, 289. 

Alexandria M. M., emigrations 
from, 273; settled, 100. 

Allegiance. See Oath of allegi- 
ance. 

Allen fam. goes West, 272, 276. 

AUin, Amey, marries Husband, 
182n. 

AUum Creek M. M., emigrants 
to, 273. 



Almond fam. goes West, 279. 

Ambrose, Alice, on Perrot, 27; 
visits Va., 21, 22. 

America, Bownas on growth of 
Q. in, 82; Q. appear in, 4. 

American army does not spare 
Q., 185. 

American Colonization Society, 
favored by Emancipation Socie- 
ty, 236; interest of N. C. Q. in, 
229-230. 

Amy, , purchases W. Berke- 
ley's share of Carolina, 55. 

Anderson fam. goes West, 274, 
276, 283. 

Andrew fam. goes West, 279. 

Andrews fam. goes West, 274. 

Anne, Queen, repeals S. C. laws, 
160. 

Anthony, Christopher, on S. 
com., 211. 

Anthony fam. goes West, 273, 
274, 279; ment'd, 101. 

Anti-slavery, strength in Va., 
243. 

Antrim fam. goes West, 272. 

Apparel, superfluity in, 128. 

Archdale, Ann, death, Q3n. 

Archdale, Capt. Edward M., 
ment'd, 53. 

Archdale, John (1), goes to Ire- 
land, 53. 

Archdale, John, a col. of mil., 54; 
agent of Gorges, 53-54; and gol- 
den age, 50-69; appeals to king's 
com., 54; arrives in Amer., 54, 
57; assumes gov't, 58; becomes 
a Prop., 56, 57; chief justice of 
Car.. 55».; convinced by Fox, 
55, 56n.; early life, 53; effects 
of administration, 59, on Q., 
61; elected to Parliament, but 



3G4 



Index. 



declines to serve, 61-63; t-sti- 
mate of work, 61; exempts 
Quakers from mil. law, 59, 
18l>; lirst mention of, 55; 
form of signature, 55; jjov. of 
Car., 5li; n-asoiis for appoint- 
ment, 57; in Boston, ."»4; inlhi- 
enced by H. More, .")/i.; laud- 
prrave of Car.. 52; makes Ake- 
hurst bis deputy, 55; motto of 
family, 53; opposes church acts, 
5'.>; overshadowed by Penn, 53; 
pleads for libt'rty of conscience, 
5'.>, 161; powers as gov.. ~u; 
publishes Descrip. of Car., 
63/1.; receives quit rents, 56//.; 
rents remitted by. 5S; results 
of visit, 56; returns to Eng., 60; 
salary, 52; share of Car. pur- 
chased, 55; succeeded by .T. 
Dawson. 61; testimony in 
Maine matter. .54; thanked by 
N. C. Assembly, 60; travels 
through X. C, 52, 60; visits 
Carolina, 56-57, 60; wins friend- 
ship of Indians and Spaniards, 
58; mentioned, 33, 63//., 65//., 
78, 129. 134, 1(;6. 

Archdale, Matthew, death, 63/i.; 
persecutes Q.. .55?/. 

Archdale. Richard, settles in 
Bucks, 53. 

Archdale, Thomas, death. 63//.; 
elected to Parliament, 63; sells 
Loake's estate, 63n.; ment'd, 
53, 65h. 

Archdale, Thomas, son of John, 
55. 

Aristotle, quoted, 3. 

Arkansas, Q. in, 316, :J17, 320. 
323. 

Arnold fam. goes West, 275-277; 
of \. C, 87, 88. 

Ash, Mr., opposes Huguenots. 58. 

Ash, John, cjirrles complaints to 
Eng., 159n. 

Ashe, Samuel A., views on 
" Cary Kebelllon," 163. 

Ashley. Lord, gov. of Car., 57. 

Atkin.son, Aaron, visits South, 
63. 64. 

Atkinson fam. goes West, 276; 
nieiit'd, 77. 

Atwood, Ann, married, 47. 

Austin, Ann, visits .Mass., 5. 



B 



Babb fam. goes to S. C, 116. 

Back Creek M. M., removals to, 
260. 

Bacon, Nathaniel, ment'd, 41n. 

Bagehot, Walter, quoted on in- 
vincible attraction, 97. 

Bailey fam. goes West, 272. 274, 
275, 279; ment'd, 100. 

Bails, Thomas. See Beales, 
Thomas. 

Baily, William, ment'd, 140. 

Baker fam. goes West, 275, 276. 

Baldwin fam. goes to N. C, 
l(i3; goes West, 276-278. 

Ball fam. goes West, 272. 

Ballard fam. goes West, 274, 279. 

Ballenger, Josiah, in Va., 97. 

Ballinger, Henry, letter to, 232. 

Ballinger, William, goes to N, C, 
IOC. 

Ballinger fam. goes to N. C, 
10:5; goes to S. C, 117; ment'd, 
100, 102. 

Baltimore Association, adminis- 
ters meeting-house fund, 317; 
contribution at end of 2 years, 
.■{!."»; estitblishes orphan house, 
313; influence on agriculture, 
314; objects, 311; organized, 
311; statistics of expenses. 312- 
316; work of, 300-316; work of 
only made possible through F. 
T. King, 311. 

Baltimore Y, M., first to send 
out emigrants, 250; separation 
in, 288. 

Bancroft, George, ment'd, 33. 

Bank notes in West. 247//. 

Bankrupt law, not to be used by 
Q., 130. 

Baptists, absorb Q.. 293; emi- 
grate to Tenn., 183; meeting- 
house used by Q., 92; not abo- 
litionists, 213; position in 
struggle for Bill of Rights, 
154; i)osition in War of Regu- 
lation, 178; work in S. C, 157, 

l."iS. 

Barker fam. goes West, 276. 
Barnard, Francis, goes to N. C, 

KtS. 
Barnard, Timothy, goes to N. C, 

108. 



Index. 



365 



Barnard, Tristrim, goes to N. C, 

108. 
Barnard fam. goes to Tenn., 253; 

leaders in Nantucket, 108. 
Barnet fam. goes West, 277. 
Barrett fam. goes to S. C, IIG; 

ment'd, 100. 
Bartin fam. goes West, 280. 
Barumi fam. goes West, 274. 
Bates, Benj., protests against 

Va. mil. law, 196. 
Bates, Elisha, buys The Philan- 
thropist, 238; ment'd, l-i'Sn. 
Bates, James, travels, 133; visits 

Phila., 51n. 
Bates, John, ment'd, 65. 
Bates fam. goes West, 274; of 

Va., 77. 
Battin fam. goes to S. C, 116. 
Battle, Kemp P., views on " Caiy 

Rebellion." 163. 
Batts, Capt. Nathaniel, ment'd, 

39tt.. 41. 
Battson, Nathaniel, ment'd, 39ft. 
Baugham fam. goes West, 273; 

of N. C, 89. 
Beacon Controversy, origin of, 

296. 
Beal fam. goes West, 272. 
Beales, Bowater, goes to N. C, 

103; travels, 137. 
Beales, Thomas, sketch of, 254- 

255; ment'd, 256, 321. 
Beales fam. goes West, 278. 
Beals, John, goes to N. C, 106. 
Beals, Prudence, goes to N. C, 

105«. 
Beals fam. goes West, 277; men- 
tioned, 102. 
Beamen fam. goes West, 275. 
Beard fam. goes to Tenn., 253; 

goes West, 277, 278, 283. 
Beauchamp fam. goes West, 279. 
Beaufort Co., N. C, Q. in, 87, 

259. 
Bedford Co., Va., Q. in, 70, 97, 

100, 286. 
Beek fam. goes West, 279. 
Beeman fam. of N. C, 88, 89. 
Beeson, Benj., goes to N. C. 103. 
Beeson, Isaac, goes to N. C, 106. 
Beeson, Isaac, goes West, 283. 
Beeson, John, goes to N. C, 106. 
Beeson, Nathaniel, goes to N. C, 

106. 



Beeson, Richard, goes to N. C, 
106. 

Beeson, Wm., goes to N. C, 103. 

Beeson fam. goes West, 272, 277- 
279, 283; ment'd, 100. 

Bell fam. goes West, 277. 

Belvidere Academy founded, 301. 

Benbow fam. goes West, 276, 
277, 279, 280; of N. C, 102. 

Benezet's treatise on S. distrib- 
uted, 205. 

Bennett, Majj Gen. Richard, 
books to, 41; characterizes 
Berkeley, 36; convinced, 36. 

Bennett's Creek, ment'd, 38, 39w.; 
laid down, 287. 

Benson, William, goes to Ga., 
121. 

Berkeley, Sir John, share of Car. 
ment'd, 55. 

Berkeley, Sir Wm., expels Dur- 
and from Va., 33; characterized 
by R. Bennett, 36; Proprietors 
to, 9; share of Car., 55; visited 
and characterized by Edmund- 
son, 36; ment'd, 16, 20, 44n. 

Berkeley Co., W. Va., Q. disap- 
pear, 100. 

Bernard fam. goes West, 277. 

Berry, William, proposes to visit 
Va., 43. 

Berry fam. goes West, 272, 273. 

Bertie Co., N. C, Q. in, 89. 

Bettle, Jr., Edward, letter on 
feeling against negro in Pa., 
233-234. 

Betts fam. goes West, 279. 

Bevin fam. goes West, 272. 

Bibliography of native Q. litera- 
ture, 140-143; of So. Quakers, 
345-362; of original MS. 
sources, 345-352; of original 
printed sources, 352-359; of 
secondary authorities, 359-362. 

Big Reedy Island, Q. at, 254. 

Bigg, John, presented and fined, 
44. 

Bill of Rights, effect on Q., 148; 
struggle for, 154-155. 

Binford fam. goes West, 274, 
275; ment'd. 77, 89. 

Binford m. Taid down, 287. 

Birdsall fam. goes West, 273. 

Births, superfluities at, 126. 

Bishop, Joseph, goes West, 259. 



366 



Index. 



BiHhup fam. got« Went. 275; 

uient'd, !»7. 
HIai'kburD fam. goc« \\\^x. 2TU, 

ir74. 
lUnrk Crtfk m. laid down. 287. 
•• Hlni-k iKH>pli' " Instead of " ne- 

lfn>." 215. 
Black Water .M. .M.. laid down. 

2S7. 
Bladen Co.. N. C. Q. In. 87. 96. 

U>2. 
Blair. Mr., niiufd, 23511. 
Blair faui. ^'ot'S West, 277. 
Blake. Jt»t««'ph. dt>piity gov. of S. 

C. 00; ni.'nfd. 157. 
T" ' '1 fam.. uiont'd. S9. 

•;in». g<i(»s Wt'st. 27«». 
i- M M. M., emigrant.'* to, 

27r,. i:71». 
nioxam fam. goes West, 274. 
Blur Hlv«'r .M. M.. emigrants to, 

201, '_»74. 27ri. 277. 278. 
! •■. John, ment'd. .VI. 

:ii. goe« West. 275, 276, 

-- .. iH.-nfd, S7. s,S. 
lioiid. .I«to«e. g<»e« West, 283. 
B<»nd, MaJ. John, disfranchised, 

2iJ. 
Bond fam. goes West. 273. 274. 

277-27t». 
B<inner'M Creek. ti>T Bennett's 

I»4«.kH. menfd in wills. 12{)-130; 

nw**! of in N. I'.. 143; presence 

of. i:hj 140; sent to Q. lu Va,. 

13. 14. 
lUxtn fam. g<»e« W«««t, 277. 
Bof>ne, Jos«-idi. carries petition 

from 8. C. to Proprietors, 1.59. 
B<»nige, K«'V. Tln)othy, tries to 

r«Hl«HMn An-hdaJe. 55n. 
Bord«tj. JoM4>ph, a.Hsigns slaves. 

227. 
Ifainlen. William, afllrmatlon not 

ri'i'd by AKH4>m., 170. 
Hordtii fam. of N. C. ment'd. 87. 
Ikjttwell fam. g<Hii Went, 276. 
liowcter, John. visltM Va., 43. 51. 
Howhfi. Aliagall. vIhIih Va.. 8.'i. 
R«>wnan fam. g<M's WeNi, ■«'7S. 
BowiuiN. S.itinti-1. visitH It. Jiir- 

dan in prlwin. 152n.: visitx 

K^mth and niiiu ma rises prog- 

rwui. H'Z; ment'd, 174 
Bowren fnra. goon Wi-Kt. 278. 



Boyer. Trcs'd't. ment'd. 231. 
Boyes, Kobert, helps ou m. h., 76. 
Bnidlield fam. goes West, 273. 

27l>. 
Bradford. William, ment'd, 179/i. 
Bradford, Wm.. menfd, 198. 
Branson, Thomas, a malcontent, 

l.so. 
Branson fam. goes West. 272, 

27;?. 27»!: menfd. 10<^^i. 
Bniy. 'rhoma.'*. work noticed. 12. 
Bray fam. goes to S. C. 116. 
Bresse. Wm.. inventory of, 130. 
Bridger. Col., to prosecute Q.. 

44. 
Bridgers fam. goes West. 280. 
Bridle. Francis, helps on m. h., 

7<!«. 
Briti.sh, do not spare Q.. 185. 
Hritish Colonies, position of Q. 

under tithe laws. 152. 
Brittaiu, Benj.. goes to N. C. 

106. 
BrittaJn family of N. C. S9. 
BriK'k. H. A., owns Q. records, 

Broik fam. goes West. 272. 
Broi-ksoppe, Joan, visits Va.. 21. 
BnK'k.><oppe, Thomas, menfd, 21. 
Brooks, Isaac, Sec. B. A.. 311. 
Brooks fam. goes to S. C, 117; 

goes West. 278, 280. 
Br<M»mhall fam. goes West. 273. 
Brothers fam. goes West, 278. 
Brown, Albert W.. drafted into 

Federal army. 306n. 
Brown. Jacob R., menfd, 268. 
Brown, James, goes to N. C. 106. 
Bn>wn. Joshua, visits South, 187. 
Brown, Josiah, ment'd, 89. 
Brown, Kirk, preserves records, 

Brown fam. goes West, 273, 275, 
276. 178, 280; gws to N. C, 103; 
goes to S. C. 11«>. 117; in Ga., 
121; menfd, 87. 8J». 100. 

Brownsville, Pa., Q. settle at, 
2 IK. 

Bruce, r. A., inciifd. .'MS. 

Hryaiii. .Vrtliur. ment'd. 87-88. 

HrvMiit fam. gfx's West, '279; 
menfd, s;>. 

Bueliaiuin fam. g(M>s W«>s(, 273. 

Bucks fo.. Pa., emigrants go 
.^lUth. 9S. 



Index. 



367 



Buffington fam. goes to S. C, 
IIG. 

Buffkin, Leavin, meeting-house 
on land of, T5h. 

Bull fam. goes to S. C, 116. 

Bundy, Caleb, builds m. h., G7?j. 

Bundy Josiah. press censor. 140. 

Bundy, Josiah, goes West, 259. 

Bundy, Wm.. imprisoned. 172. 

Bundy fam. goes West, 274-279; 
meut'd, 77, S7, 88. 

Bunker, Reuben, goes to N. C, 
108. 

Bunker fam. goes West, 276, 283. 

Bunting fam. goes West. 272. 

Burgess, John, goes West, 283. 

Burgess fam. goes West, 274; 
ment'd, 101. 

Burials, superfluities at, 126. 

Burleigh m. laid down, 286. 

Burnyeat, John, advises organi- 
zation, 46; effects of visit to 
Va., 28, 29. 

Burris fam. goes West, 278. 

Burroiigh. Edward, Works of. 40. 

Bush River M. M., S. C, Char- 
leston conveyed to, 94; emi- 
grations West, 266-267, 279-280, 
307n.; gift of slaves to, 227n.; 
histoiy. 95. 115-117. 124, 183; 
warned against politics, 185. 

Business obligations, care of, 130. 

Butler fam. goes West, 274, 280; 
ment'd, 101. 

Butterworth fam. goes West, 
274. 

Byer, Richard, imprisoned, 172. 



c 



Cadwalader fam. goes West, 273, 

274. 
Cadwallader fam. goes West, 

273; ment'd, 101. 
Caldwell, David, ment'd, 138. 
Caldwell, Vincent, visits South, 

73)(. 
Camden. S. C, origin of Q. in, 

114-115. 
Cammack fam. goes West, 280. 
Camness fam. goes West, 278. 
Camp Creek, Va., Q. go to N. C, 

103. 
Campbell Co.. Va.. Q. emigrate, 

286; Q. in, 70, 97. 100. 



Canada, fund for m. h., 317. 
Canby fam. goes West, 273. 
Cane Creek M. M., N. C, emi- 
grations to Tenn., 183, 253; to 
West, 265. 2r6; history, 103-104, 
112; letter to on S., 201; op- 
poses receiving slaves, 225-227; 
trouble in, 180-181. 
Cane Creek M. M., S. C, decline 

of, 267; settled, 95, 116. 
Cannaday fam. goes West, 278. 
Canon fam. goes West, 277. 
Cape Fear section, Q. leave, 286. 
Carl fam. goes West, 279. 
Carle fam. goes West, 273, 274. 
Carlyle, Thomas, quoted, 198. 
Carolina, dissent in, 8, 9, 12; Q. 
planted by Edmundson and 
Fox, 30. 
" Carolina," correct use of by Q., 

281«. 
Carolinas, first appearance of Q. 
in, 1; Q. disfranchised, 1; 
shares of, 55. 
Caroline M. M., Va., action on 

S., 211. 
Carr, Sir Robert, com. to Gorges, 

53. 
Carr, Thomas, goes to N. C., 103. 
Carr fam. goes West, 278. 
Carson fam. goes West, 278. 
Carter, John, presents petition, 

305. 
Carter fam. goes West, 279; 

ment'd, 100. 
Carteret, Lord, share of Car. 
ment'd, 55; signs church acts, 
159??. 
Carteret, Peter, ment'd, 39n. 
Carteret Co., N. C, Q. disappear 
from, 259, 286, 295; Q. in, 87, 
88, 90, suit for liberty of slaves 
in, 229. 
Cartwright family of N. C, 87. 
Caruthers, Eli W., on H. Hus- 
band, 181. 
Carver family ment'd, 102. 
Carver's Creek M. M., N. C, his- 
tory, 96, 102, 294??.; visit of 
Reckitt, 91. 
Caiy, Miles, ment'd. 66. 
Cary, Thomas, accedes to wishes 
of popular party. 165; begins 
active rebellion, 165; gov. cf N. 
C, 60, 161, 164; interviewed by 



1 



308 



1 n(i(j\ 



Story, 75; not ro<x>KulrtNl by 
tJlorer. 1G4: pnxnjroH iu*\v law 
afciiliwl g.. UC: ri'llfflouH vIi'WH, 
U^: rvmuvfil fiMin ottico. KC^; 
Knui-tlutm t'Iectl«>u of tJlovcr. 
Itvl; sketch t>r. 0C». 01; sus- 
lK»ntlt'«l. l^Ui; t<inlers onth ti> Q., 
Urj; trlt>« to niptun- Hyde. lt'>r»; 
wifm in HtruK«l»'. Hi"'; UK'nt'd. 
■ >. liM. UMJ. 

< ary fiiin. >:»♦*« Wrtit, 279. 

•• Car)' ItflK'lllou," beKlnnlUK. 
1«2; Dr. Hawks on. 105; errors 
of i>o|>uIar party. ItVi; Influence 
on pnl>ll>' Krl<-mls. Tl»: |M>sltion 
of g.. 1(k'>-10<1 172-173. 17S; 
UKUal and modem views on, 
lf.l-l»V{. 

' • t fain. j;oe« West, 270. 

< 1 wl»a Indians, ment'd. l(>7fi. 
Cale fam. ffoes West, 279; of Va.. 

77, 
<" Tljoinn.K, menfd. 4S. 

.lf<-llne of S>uthfrn Q.. 

('av.> fam. kck-s West. 280. 
<;»'<lar Creek M. M.. aetlon on S., 

an. 20C>. 213; eiulpniUon.s from. 

274. 
<%Hlar Creek School Co.. work, 

144. 
C<*ll. Jonathan, a nwlcontent, 

l.W(). Srr tilfxt St»ll. .1.. and Still. 

\ 
' '>y fain, mn-s West, 273. 
' ' •. — TH. literary. api>olnt»'d. 14<t. 

< .iitnil N. ('.. rem<»val to from 
i;tHtcrn countlefl. 2<'i<j2<U. 2H«'i. 

«'4-iitr«' M. M., emlnniuts to. 270; 
•..rtl.Hl. l«r.». IIJ. 

< h:i.l\vl.-k family of N. «'.. S7. 
«;halfiint fam. K'X's West. 279. 
t.'halklry. Thomas, advises i)ay- 

ment for lands, i»9n.; <»n use of 
li<|tiorM. 127; sketch of, 73; 
visits rharl<««ton. 71^79; visits 
Mouth. «V4, 73-74, .S3; menfd. S.3. 
91. 134. 
Champion, Kuther. visits South. 

fam. KooM West. 278. 
family of N. C. 102. 
Ciuipi'l fam. |c<Mii West. 274. 27.^; 

iiirnt'd, HO. 
Ctm|>e| r««e manor. nientM. .Vl. 



Chajilaln of Assem.. quarrel over, 

l.m 
Chapman, .lohn A., menfd, 307n. 
Chanicterlzation of Q.. 29. 
Charles. Samuel, on race preju- 
dice in Ind.. 232-233. 
(Muirles fam. poes West. 275. 
Charlie City Co., Q. in. 82, 85; 

Q. leave, 280. 
Charleston meetinsr. history. 93- 
94; visit of Chalkley. 78-79; of 

I'eisley and Peyton. 91-92. 
Chatham Co.. N. C. Quakers in. 

7(». 101. 
Chawner fam. goes West. 275. 
Cheadlc family of Va.. 77. 
Cheshire. .Toseph Blount, opposes 

refugee tlieorj-. 34. 
Chew. Alice, menfd. 204. 
Chew. Samuel, visited. 204. 
Chew fam. goes West, 279. 
Choptank. Md., menfd, -IS. 
Chowan Kivor, menfd, 38, 39w. 
Christian religion, bill to provide 

for opp(jsed by Q., 155-150. 
Christison, Wenlock, quoted, 

22h.; visits Va., 29n. 
(^huckatuck m. laid down, 287. 
Church and State, first separated 

In Va., 1.54. 
Churchman, .lohn, recognizes 

spirit of emigration, 291; visits 

Va., 99. 
Churchman. Margaret, visits 

South. s:{-S4. 
<'ivil War (English), ch.aracteris- 

lU's of ]teriod, 2. 
Civil War (C. S.), Q. in, 303-307; 

services of men of Q. descent, 

2S0h. 
Clarendon. Edward. Earl of. 8. 
('lark. A.senath. superintends 

boarding school, 301. 
Clark. Dougan. sketch, 301; 

menfd. ■:521. 
Clark, Dr. Dougan, menfd, 284. 
Clark. tJeorge Rogers, work of, 

24.'v 
(JIark, .lohn, founds Lynchburg. 

loin. 
Clark fam. goes to N. C. 103; 

g<ws to S. C, 110; goes West, 

27<; 279, 2S3; of Va., 77, 101, 

1 • 12. 



Index. 



369 



Clarkson, Robert, convinced, 13; 
corresponds with E. Harris, 14. 

Claton fam. goes West, 277. 

Clayton fam. goes West, 277; 
ment'd, 102. 

Cleaver fam. goes West, 273. 

Clergy. See Establishment. 

Cloud, Joseph, influence on S. 0. 
emigration, 266; visits Ga., 124. 

Cloud fam. goes West, 276. 

Coale. Wm., death, 20/i.; impris- 
oned in Va., 20. 

Coate, William, of S. C, 115. 

Coats fam. goes West, 280. 

Cocke, Thos., Jr., informer, 44. 

Coffee fam. goes West, 273, 276- 
279. 

Coffey fam. goes West, 274. 

Coffin, Abel, buys books, 300. 

Coffin, Addison, conductor on 
Underground R. R., 242; on 
Western emigration, 284; or- 
ganizes new emigration, 309- 
310; sketch, 309. 

Coffin, Barnabas, goes to N. C, 
108. 

Coffin, Charles F., publishes ac- 
count of Q. settlement in N. C, 
32-33JI.; ment'd, 284, 321. 

Coffin, Elijah, on emigration 
from Nantucket, 107; ment'd, 
143n. 

Coffin, Joseph, goes to N. C, 108. 

Coffin, Levi, account of Manu- 
mission Society, 236; edn<^ates 
negroes, 231; founds library, 
299-300; on Nantucket emigra- 
tion, 107n.; on work c,1 W. 
Swaim, 240; opposes Amer. Col. 
Soc, 229; Pres. Underground R. 
R., 242, 321; supports claims of 
C. Osborn, 237?*.; ment'd, 143/i., 
321. 

Coffin, Libni, goes to N. C, 107, 
108. 

Coffin, Peter, goes to N. C, 108. 

Coffin, Samuel, goes to N. C, 
108. 

Coflln, Seth, goes to N. C, 108. 

Coffin, Vestal, educates negroes, 
231; organizes Undergroiuid R. 
R., 242, 321. 

Coffin, William, goes to N. C, 
107-108. 



Coffin, William, Jr., goes to N. 
C, 108. 

Coffin fam. goes West, 276-279; 
join Manu. Soc, 239; leaders in 
Nantucket, 108. 

Cole, Josiah, expelled from Va., 
15; sketch, 14n.; visits Va., 14, 
20. 

Cole fam. goes West, 273. 

Coleman fam. goes West, 276. 

Colleton, signs church acts, 159m^; 
mentioned, 65n. 

Colleton, Sir John, quoted, 9; 
share of Car. ment'd, 55. 

Collier fam. goes West, 275; of 
N. C, 89. 

Colonization and Manumission 
Society. See Manumission So- 
ciety. 

Columbia Co., Ga., Q. in, 118. 

Columbiana Co., O., emigration 
to, 273, 274. 

Colyer fam. goes West, 276. 

Commons fam. goes West, 279. 

Commonwealth period, charac- 
teristics, 2. 

Comner fam. goes West, 280. 

Como fam. goes West, 273. 

Compton fam. goes West, 279, 
280. 

Concord M. M., emigrants to, 
260, 265, 272, 273, 275, 279; 
settled. 250, 259. 

Confederacy, treatment of Q., 
303-307. 

Conformity, required in S. C, 
158. 

Congregations, Quaker, list, 334- 
344. 

Congress, seizes records of meet- 
ings for sufferings, 185-186. 

Connard fam. goes West, 272. 

Connie-oak Bay, ment'd, 38, 39». 

Contentnea M. M., N. C, emigra- 
tions from, 260, 275; history, 
74, 87-88. 

Contentnea Q., emigrations from, 
256-259; relief in, 311. 

Continental currency, refused by 
Q., 184, 185. 

Cook fam. goes to S. C, 117; go^ 
West, 276-278, 280. 

Cope, Gilbert, ment'd, 352. 

Cope fam. goes West, 272. 



.370 



I ml ex. 



Copelaud, John. lives in Va.. OS; 
losfs ear in N. E., iHi. 

Copi'land. .luhn. of N. C, 89. 90. 

('opt'land fain, fjoes West. 275: of 
N. C. SS. Sl». 

('oi)iKH-k fani. goe.s to S. C. IIG; 
noes to Ga., llil; goes West, 
2so. 

Ck>re Sound M. M.. N. C, emigra- 
tions from. 259-200. 275; his- 
tory. 74. S7; sends negroes 
W.sr. 228. 

Coriu-r (or Comer) fam. goes 
W.'st. 27(!. 

('o.sau(l fam. goes West, 274, 275. 
279. 

Cox. Hermon, regulator. 182. 

Cox, Hermon (2). regulator. 182. 

Cox, Isaac, goes to N. C. 100. 

Cox. Isaac, regulator. 182. 

Cox. .Jeremiah, goes West, 282. 

Cox. .Jonathan E., conducts 
boarding school, 302. 

Cox. Peter, goes to N. C. IOC. 

Cox, Samuel, regulator. 182. 

Cox, Samuel (2). regulator. ISO. 

Cox, Solomon, goes to N. C, 103. 

Cox. Thomas, goes to N. C, 103. 

Cox, William, goes to N. C. 103. 

Cox fain, go^-s West. 274-277, 
280; of \. C, 88, 102. 103; of 
S. C. 115. 

Coxe. Richard, mont'd, S7. 

Craig fam. goes West, 273. 

Cramjiton fam. goes West, 272. 

Craven. Earl, share of Car.. 55; 
signs church acts, 159«.; men- 
tioned. 05w. 

Craven, Charles. encourages 
Chalkley, 7.S-79. 

Craven Co.. X. ('.. Q. in. S7; Q. 
leave. 259, 2S«;. 

Creek fam. goes West. 274. 

Crenshaw, .John It., presents pe- 
tition. 305. 

Crow, .James, dlsowne<l, 20."i. 

(Jrew, John, meiit'd, 70. 

Crew fam. goes West, 274, 275; 
of N. (]., M»; of Va.. 77. 

Criiipin. Paul, nient'd. s5. 

Crisp. Stephen, nient'd. 21. 

Cromwell. Oliver, nient'd. 'M>. 

Crooki**! Hun .M. M.. Va., emlgra- 
tlons from, '-150, 273; settled. 
UK). 



Culpeper, Lord, favors Q., 45, 46. 
Culpeper Co., Va., Q. emigrate, 

100, 293; Q. in. 70, 100. 
Culpeper Rebellion, position of 

CJ., 171-172; ment'd. 33. 
Cumberland Road, building of, 

240; used by Q., 248. 
Curl fam. goes West, 273, 274. 
Curies M. M., Va.. history, 70-77. 

D 

Dancing, testimony against. 128. 

Daniel. Robert, conflicts with Q., 
101; removed from office. 161, 
163; ment'd, 159«.. 162, 164. 

Dauson fam. goes West, 279. 

Davis, George, quoted, 23n. 

Davis fam. goes West, 272-277, 
279. 280; of N. C, 87, 89. 

Dawson, .John, a Prop.. 01. 

Day family of Va., 100. 

Days of week, names for, 131. 

Dean fam. goes West, 278. 

Decline of Southern Q., 280-307; 
begins in Eastern Va., 85-80; 
causes of, 85, 291-295. 

Deep River M. M., N. C, emigra- 
tions West, 264. 278; history, 
104. 109. 

Delaware, emigrants to N. C, 
108. 

Delaware Indians, visited by 
Thos. Beales. 255. 

Delon fam. goes West, 274. 

Democratic tendencies of Q.. 185. 

Dennis, Thos., Jr., goes to N. C, 
! 106. 
! Dennis fam. goes West, 277. 

Denny fam. goes West, 278. 
, Denson, Francis, ment'd, 76n. 
I Denson, James, ment'd. 76«. 
j Denson. Jolin, ment'd. 70/i. 
I Denson family in Va. and N. C, 
77. S9. 

D'Eon. Chevalier, ment'd, 351. 

Deputies of Props, turned out, 
102. 

Di'w, Joseph, hastens emigra- 
tion, 257. 

Dew fam. goes West, 275; of N. j 

C, S7. ,/' 

Dewes, Col. Thomas, books to, I 
40; convinced, 37. / 



Index. 



371 



Dickinson, James, visits Va. and 

N. C, 51-52, 79-SO; ment'd, 48. 
Diclis, Natlian, goes to N. C, 

10(5. 
Diclis, Peter, goes to N. G., 106; 

on evolution of Centre section, 

109. 
Diclvs, Zachariah, goes to N. C, 

106; slietch of and influence on 

S. C. migration, 266, 307w.; 

travels, 137. 
Dicks fam. goes West, 274, 277. 
Dictionaiy of Nat. Biog. quoted, 

71. 
Dillhorn fam. goes West, 273. 
Dillon fam. goes to N. C, 103; 

goes West, 273, 276. 
Dilworth, Ann, visits South, 63. 
DilvForth, James, visits South, 

63. 
Disfranchisement of free negroes 

in N. C, 231. 
Disownment for S. holding, 205, 

213, 217; weakens Q., 292. 
Dissensions weaken Q., 291, 292. 
Dissent, status of in South, 7-12. 
Dissenters, disfranchised in N. 

0., 161; in S. C, 158; pleased 

with Gary, 162; strength in S. 

G., 157; in Va., 155; views on 

Vestry act, 163-164. 
Dissenting ministers, not ex- 
empted from military acts, 174. 
Distillers to be disowned, 129. 
Distilling, attention to, 244. 
Disturbance of worship, law 

against, 148-149. 
Dixon, Joshua, regulator, 182. 
Dixon, Joshua, on S. in So. 

States, 199-200. 
Dixon, Simon, goes to N. G., 103. 
Dixon, Thomas, goes to N. G., 

108. 
Dixon fam. goes West, 276; in 

Ga., 121. 
Doan, John, goes to N. G., 103. 
Doan, Joseph, goes to N. C., 103. 
Doan fam. goes West, 276. 
Dobbs, Arthur, ment'd, 114?i. 
Dobbs Go., N. G., Q. in, 87, 90. 
Doctor, a skeptical, in N. C., 38. 
Dodd fam. goes West, 275. 
Dodwell, Henry, tries to redeem 
Archdale, 55w. 



Dortch, William T., aids Q., 305. 
Doudna fam. goes West, 275; of 

N. G., 188. 
Dougherty family of N. G., 89. 
Douglass, Achilles, visits South, 

187; founds Lynchburg, lOln. 
Douglass family of Va., 101. 
Dover M. M., emigrations West, 

265. 
Draper fam. goes West, 274, 275. 
Drummond, Wm., ment'd, 32ji. 
Duck Greek M. M., emigrants to, 

278. 
Duncan fam. goes to S. G. and 

Ga., 117. 
Dunn, Richard, founds m., 102. 
Dunn's Greek meeting, history, 

102; visit of Reckitt, 91. 
Durant, George, sketch, 33-34. 
Du Simitiere, ment'd, 179». • 
Dyer, Sarah, ment'd, 129. 

E 

Earlham Gollege ment'd, 283. 
Early fam. goes West, 274. 
Bast & West, struggle between 

in N. G. and Va., noticed, 84. 
Eastchurch, Gov., ment'd, 171. 
Eastern N. G., families in, 77. 
Eastern Q., pays war tax, 185. 
Eastern Shore, decline of Q., 85- 

86, 287; Q. on, 29, 81; visit of 

Dickinson and Wilson, 51; 

visits of Friends, 64. 
Eastern Va., decline begins in, 

85-86; Q. families in, 77. 
Eaves fam. goes West, 279. 
Economic spirit, influence, 291. 
Edenton, ment'd, 38, 39«. 
Edgecombe Go., N. G., Q. in, 88- 

90. 
Edgerton fam. goes West, 275; 

of N. G., 88. 
Edgeworth Sem'ry founded, 300. 
Edisto meeting, history, 94-95, 

110; visit of Evans, 122. 
Edmundson, William, journal 

contradicts refugee theory, 35; 

Puritan training of, 42; sketch, 

30; time of second visit, 41n; 

views on slavery. 198; visits 

Berkeley, 36; visits Va., N. G. 

and Md., 30-32, 35-37, 41-43; 



372 



Iiidex. 



ment'il, 21, 45. 4G, 49. 51, 84, 
86. 290, 294. 
Edmundson fam. goes to S. C, 

110, 117. 

Education, attempts at in Va., 

143-144; becomes important in 

N. C, 297; present conditions in 

N. C. 317-318; statistics, 302; 

of money spent for, 312-31G; 

universality of among Q., 302, 

314; worli for after war, 300, 

312-316. 

Education of negro, efforts for, 

215. 2.31; interest of ISIanu. Soc. 

in. 239; laws against. 232; laclc 

of. 202; neglected in A'a.. 212. 

Edwards, .John, informer, 44. 

Edwards fam. goes to N. C. 103; 

goes West. 27G-27S. 
Effingham. Lord, instructed, 45. 
Eigliteentli century, divisions of i 
Q. history in, 70, 71; expansion 
in. 70-125. 
Elizabeth City Co., Va., Q. in, 

75. 
Ellen fam. goes West, 273. 
Elliott, Abram, goes to N. C, 

lOf). 
Elliott, .Tacob, goes to N. C, 106. 
Elliott fam. goes West. 273, 275, 

278, 283; in N. C, 77. 89. 
Ellis, William, visits South. 63. 

64. 
Ellis fam. goes West, 272. 
Ellwood, Thomas, arrested, 55n. 
Ellyman fam. goes -West. 280. 
Ellyson fam. of Va.. 77. 
Elmore fam. of Va., 77. 
Emancipation, advocated in Va., 
243; an cxpi-riinont in, 214; be- 
ginnings in N. C, 208; f(jrm of 
free papers. 222/i.; hindrances 
to in N. C. 209-210; in Va.. 210; 
Judge aids in, 218-219; Mifllin 
aids in, 219; not recognized by 
Co. courts. 209-210; Q. arrested 
for promoting. 222; results of 
defects In law. 216; results of 
N. C. law of 1779 on, 217; sum- 
marj' of N. C. law. 209. 224; 
Va. law on. 20."-20(;. 212: urged 
bv T. Nichol.son, 20S; Va. Q. 
on. 216. 
EmanclfKitor, The, meut'd, 239;i. 



Embree, Eliliu, ment'd, 239«. 
Embree, Elijah, ment'd, 239. 
Embree fam. goes West, 273. 
Emigrants, equipment of, 247- 

248. 
Emigration, evil results threat- 
ened, 310; from Ga., 280, 307n.; 
from N. C, 251, 259-265, 309; 
from S. C. 265-268. 307n.; from 
Va., 249-251; impressions on 
Evans, 254; on Williams, 263- 
264; of Trent M. M., 256-259; 
Q. go out to exploi'e country, 
257; resolution against, 252, 
255-256; S. C. Q. refuse to give 
certificates for, 268; to Central 
N. C, 260-261. 
Emperor, Mrs. Mary, persecuted, 

23-25. 
Endsley, John, goes West, 283. 
England, influence of Q. neutral- 
ity, 185; money from for books, 
299; Q. faithful to, 183; spread 
of Q. in, 3, 4. 
EngHsh ancestry of native ele- 
ment. 95. 
English Church. See Established 

Church. 
English Q. assist to build m. h., 
317; pay war taxes, 175; sink 
into quietism, 294. 
Eno meeting set up, 104. 
Enquirer, denounces slavery, 243. 
Episcopal churches, Q. preach 

in, 156?i. 
Episcopalians, strength in S. C, 

157. 
Erwin fam. goes West, 273. 
Established Church, abolition of, 
154-155; amount of tithes to be 
ascertained, 151; and Q., 145- 
170; beginnings in S. C, 157- 
100; growth influenced by to- 
bacco, l.">3; in Ga., 168; last 
quarrel within Va., 156; laws 
of Va. for support of, 149. 150, 
153; N. C. vestry acts, 100-162; 
opposed by Q., 1; protests 
against payments to, 150; reac- 
tion in favor of. 165; steady 
testimony against, 167; strength 
in Va., 145; struggle against in 
Va. contrasted with N. C, 148; 
sulTcrings under, 167; ultimate 
aim of Proprietors of Car., 12. 



Index. 



373 



Establishment See Established 
Church. 

Estaugh, John, sketch of, 72«.; 
visits South, 72-73. 

Evangelical Friends, origin, 29G. 

Evans, Benj., invents screw 
auger, llln. 

Evans, Joshua, aids in emanci- 
pation, 220; visits Ga., 122-123; 
visits Nicholites, 110; visits 
Tenn., 253-254. 

Evans, Robert, ment'd, 115. 

Evans, "William, on school- 
houses, 302. 

Evans fam. goes West, 272, 273, 
275, 277, 279. 

Exemptions from parish levies 
in Va., 150; in Va., 187-188. 

Expansion in ISth century, 70- 
125; in N. C, 74, 86-88; of na- 
tive element, 95. 



F 



Fairfax Co., Va., Q. in, 98-100, 

286. 
Fairfield M. M., emigrants to, 

249, 272, 274, 276, 278, 279; to 

la., 251; to N. C, 102, 103, 105; 

loss from Sheridan's raid, 303; 

settled, 98. 
Fall Creek M. M., emigrants to, 

278. 
Falling Creek M. M., N. C, his- 
tory, 87-88; emigration to Cane 

Creek, 103. 
Fallowfleld, Jacob, visits N. C, 

52. 
Families in Curies M. M., 77. 
Families in Eastern N. C, 77. 
Family names of emigrants 

West, 272-280. 
Far fam. goes West, 273. 
Farlow fam. goes West, 276. 
Farmer, Nathan, regulator, 182. 
Farmer, William, meeting settled 

at house of, 123, 124. 
Farmer fam. goes West, 276, 277, 

279, 280; in Ga., 121; in N. C, 

89. 
Fashions, condemned, 128, 131. 
Faucett fam. goes West, 272, 273. 
Faulkner, Charles J., urges 
emancipation, 243. 



Faulkner fam. goes West, 272, 
273. 

Fauquier Co., Va., Q. in, 70. 

Faust fam. goes West, 276. 

Fayette Co., Pa., emigration to, 
272, 273, 275. 

Federal army, Q. in, 303, 306n. 

Fellow fam. goes West, 276. 

Fellsee, John, report on negro 
emigration to Hayti, 230-231. 

Penwick, Thomas, ment'd, 24«. 

Ferrall fam. goes West, 273, 274. 

Ferris, Benj., visits South, 202. 

Fiddling, testimony against, 128. 

Fielding, Joshua, visits S. C. and 
travels north overland, 82-83. 

Financial condition of Q. indi- 
cated, 111, 112-113. 

Finch fam. goes West, 272. 

Fisher, Mary, visits Mass., 5; 
ment'd, 140. 

Fisher fam. goes West, 274, 279; 
of Va., 101. 

Flanner fam. goes West, 276. 

Fleming family in Curies M. M., 
77. 

Fletcher, Joshua, travels with 
Reckitt, 90; ment'd, 89. 

Fletcher fam. goes West, 275, 
283. 

Florida, fund for m. h., 317; 
statistics of Q., 320, 323. 

Fodra fam. goes West, 275. 

Folger fam., leaders in Nantuck- 
et, 108. 

Foreign element in Southern Q. 
attains full growth by Revo- 
lution, 108; becomes predomi- 
nant, 84; character, 96-97, 101; 
effect of Revolution on, 108; 
importance, 96; in Va., 100- 
101; in S. C, 115; motives of 
emigration, 96; reasons for set- 
tling in particular spots. 97. 

Forms, hostility of Q. to, 292-293. 

Fornication, among Southern Q. 
and in Mass., lS'2n. 

Fort River meeting ment'd, 90. 
Forts, Q. assist in building, 173. 

Foster fam. goes West, 277. 

Fotbergill, 'John, notices decline 
of Q., 85; visits South, 78, 80- 
81, 83, 99. 



37-4 



Index. 



Fothergill. Samuel, on S. in So. 
suites. 199-200; visits South, 
92-93. lis: ment'd, 143. 

Fonts, Marpaivt. meut'd, 281. 

Fowler. Robert, ment'd. 15. 

Fox, Georjre, advice on S. applied 
in Va., 204; books to be re- 
printed, 140. 143; disciplines So- 
ciety. 40; establishes meetings 
in Va.. 37; exhorts Q. to visit 
Indians. 41; holds meetings in 
Va., 40; initiates keeping of re- 
cords. 25, 26. 346; itinerary on 
visit to N. C, 38; life of men- 
tioned, 9S/l; sketch of and evo- 
lution of his society, 3, 4; sug- 
gests union between N. C. and 
S. C. Q.. 49; treatment of Es- 
tablished Church, 3; visits In- 
dians, 39; visits Md., 40; visits 
N. C, 37-40; visits Ya., .30, 37, 
39, 40; wades ashore from boat, 
38; ment'd, 21, 34, 35. 45, 46, 
49, 84-86, 198. 288, 290, 294. 

Fox fam. goes West, 274. 

Frankland, Henry, visits South, 
73«. 

Frazer, Aaron, goes to N. C, 106. 

Frazer, .Tames, goes to N. C, 106. 

Frazier fam. goes Wesf, 277. 

Frederick Co., Va., Q. banished 
to, 186-187; Q. in, 70, 83, 97- 
100, 286. 

Fredericksburg M. M., history, 
115. 

Free ntgro, disfranchised in N. 
C. 231; numbers in 18.50, 2:i2n.; 
should he sent to Africa, 237. 

Free Quakers, organized. 184. 

Free States, committee to exam- 
ine laws of, 227-228. 

Free womep urged to go West, 
229. 

Freedmen, schools for, 313. 

Freed(jm of worship. See Reli- 
gious freedom. 

Fret'inau fam. goes West, 2/6. 

French and Indian Wffc-, troi/bles 
of Q. during. 174-176\ 

French rrnti'Stnnts, sti^on^h in 
S. C, 157. ^ 

French refugee^, exeiopt(>a from 
fomify levies,' 150. / 

Fruit Hill m. Efieut'a, 26^, 

Fulgl)nm fam. jHOi'^West, 275. 



Fundamental Constitutions, reli- 
gion in, 10, 11, 12. 
Furnas, John, ment'd, 115. 
Furnas fam. goes West, 280. 



G 



Galbreath fam. goes to S. C, 116; 
goes West. 280. 

Gant family in S. C, 115. 

Gardner, Richard, goes to N. C, 
108. 

Gardner, Stephen, goes to N. C, 
108. 

Gardner, William, goes to N. C, 
108. 

Gardner fam. goes West. 277, 
278; join Manu. Soc, 239. 

Garrett fam. goes West, 277. 

Garrison, AVilliam Lloyd, antici- 
pated by Charles Osboru, 236n.; 
Life of quoted on anti-slavery 
papers, 239h.; ment'd, 321. 

Gartrite, Ephm., ment'd, 76. 

Gartrite, Samuel, ment'd, 76. 

Garwood fam. goes West, 273. 

Gaunt fam. goes to S. C, 117; 
goes West, 280. 

Genius of Universal Emancipation, 
grew out of The Philanthropist, 
239«.; issued, 23Sh., 239. 

George fam. goes West, 272. 

Georgia, emigrations from, 267, 
268, 272, 280; decline of m., 124; 
emancipation feeling among 
Methodists. 219/i.; emancipa- 
tion laws, 219h.; Establishment 
in, lOS; grant to Maddock and 
Still, 118; Indian incursion, 119- 
120; influence on place of hold- 
ing y. M., 123; letter of Stan- 
ton, 124; meetings in, 328-344; 
mil. laws and Q., 177, 190, 195; 
oath of allegiance in, 194; peti- 
tion to Assem. on S.. 219; Q. 
emigi-ato, 286, 295. 307h.; Q. dis- 
franchised in, 1; Q. favored in 
charter, 118. 108. 170; Q. settlo- 
ment.s in. 70, 92, 97, 104. 117- 
124, 265; settlement of, 11; 
status of dissent, 11, 12; visit 
of Cloud, 124; of Evans. 122- 
123, 2.53; of S. Fotlicrgill, 92, 
IIS; of Savcry, 122; o£ Scatter- 



y -/ 



/!' 




Index. 



375 



good, 117; of Scott, 122; of 
Thomas and Winston, 187. 

German Friends in N. C, men- 
tioned, 109n. 

German Protestants, exempted 
from parisli levies, 150, 152. 

Germans among emigrants 
South, 71, 9(3. 

Germantown protest against 
S., 198-199. 

Gifford, Jonathan, goes to N. C., 
108. 

Gifford fam. goes West, 276. 

Gilbert. James, persecuted. 23. 

Gilbert fam. goes West. 273, 277. 

Gill, Roger, sketch, 64; visits 
South, 64-69. 

Glaister, Joseph, sketch, 134. 

Glover, WiUiam, Gov. of N. C., 
163; not a friend of popular 
party, 165; object of election 
of, 164; refuses to recognize 
Gary, 164; tenders oaths to pop- 
ular party, 164. 

Godby. Anna, ment'd, 129. 

Gold among Q. in Rev., 190-191. 

Golden Age of Southern Q., 50- 
69. 

Goode family of Va., 77. 

Goodwin fam. goes West, 275. 

Goose Creek M. M., Va. (N.), 
emigration from, 250, 272-273; 
loss from Sheridan's raid, 303. 

Goose Creek M. M.. Va. (S.), 
emigration from, 249-251, 273; 
history, 100-101; laid down, 287. 

Gordon, Rev. WilUam, on origin 
of Q., 35; quoted, 159«. 

Gordon fam. goes West, 277. 

Gorges. Ferdiuando, gov. oT Me., 
53, 54. 

Gough, .James, Life quoted, 114w. 

Gould, Daniel, visits South, 78n. 

Gove. Richard, probably visits 
Sotith. 63; visits Va.. 64. 

Governor of N. C, books to, 41; 
receives Fox kindly, 38. 

Graham. William A., speech 
against proposed test oath, 304- 
305. 307. 

Grant. U. S.. ment'd. 9Sm. 

Granville, John, Lord, indiffer- 
ent to wishes of subjects, 159- 
160; instructions of ment'd, 59; 
signs church acts. 159n.; tries 



to establish church in S. C., 
158-160; visit to, 141. 

Grassy Valley, Q. at, 253. 

Grave fam. goes West, 276. 

Gravelly Hill, school at, 144. 

Gravelly Hills, school proposed, 
215. 

Gravelly Run, school at, 215. 

Gravelly Run M. M., Va., emi- 
gration from, 274; laid down, 
287. 

Graves, William, regulator, 182. 

Gravestones, opposition to, 132. 

Gray, Gen. Alex., aids Manu. 
Soc, 236-237. 

Gray fam. goes West, 279; men- 
tioned, 89. 

Grayson Co., Va., emigrations 
West, 263-264; Q. in, 109, 254, 
256. 

Green fam. goes West, 279, 280. 

Green Spring, Va., Q. at, 36. 

Greene, Katherin, ment'd, 129. 

Greene, Nathaniel, letter to Q., 
187. 

Greene, Wm., ment'd, 129. 

Gregg fam. goes West. 272, 274. 

Grellet, Stephen, on emancipa- 
tion among Methodists, 219n.; 
on Core Sound M. M., 260; 
preaches in Epis. Church, 
156n.; visits Nicholites, 110. 

Grendon, Lt. Col. Thos., infor- 
mer, 44, 45. 

Grey fam. goes West, 277. 

Grifiin fam. of N. C, 89. 

Griffith, John, recognizes spirit 
of emigration, 291; visits South. 
111-112, 203, ment'd. 86. 

Grigg fam. goes West, 278. 

Growth of Society, character of 
in 17 centurj% 70; greatest, 124- 
125; not noticed by ministers. 
68; in N. C. and Va., 82. 

Grubb fam. goes West, 273. 

Guier fam. goes West, 275. 

Guilford College, evolved from 
New Garden Boarding School, 
318. 

Guilford Co., emigrants to from 
Nantucket. 107-108; from Car- 
ver's Creek, 102; from eastern 
N. C, 260; emigrations from, 
283; origin of Q. in, 70, 101; Q. 
increase in, 286. 



37G 



Index. 



Gum Swamp, S. C, Q. meeting, 

95, 113-114. 
Gurley fam. goes West, 278. 
Gurney, Jos. J., influence of, 295 

297. 
Gurrell fam. goes West, 274. 



H 



Hackney fam. goes West, 272. 
Hadley *fam. goes West, 276, 279. 
Hadly fam. goes West, 276. 
Hague fam. goes West, 272, 277. 
Hale fam. goes West, 276, 278. 
Half Yearly Meetings ment'd, 46. 
Halifax Co., N. C, Q. in, 89. 
Halifax Co., Va., Q. in. 70, 100. 
Hall, Moses, ment'd, 76«. 
Hall fam. goes West, 275, 276; of 

N. C, 88, 89. 
Hallowell, on Q. in Mass., 6. 
Ham fam. goes West, 278. 
Hammer, Isaac, sketch, 136-137. 
Hampshire Co., W. Va., Q. leave, 

100. 
Hampton fam. goes West, 273. 
Hamton, Thomas, ment'd, 70h. 
Handcock, Steven, imprisoned, 

172. 
Hank fam. goes West, 273. 
Hanna fam. goes West, 273. 
Hanover Co., Va., Q. in, 77, 82, 

85; Q. leave, 286. 
Hare fam. goes West, 274. 
Hargrave fam. goes West, 274. 
Harlan fam. goes West, 277. 
Harmar fam. goes to S. C, 116. 
Harrel fam. goes West, 275. 
Harris, Eliz., plants Q. in Va., 

13. 
Harris fam. goes West, 273, 275, 

276, 278, 279, 283; of N. C, 87; 

of Va., 77. 
Harrison, Benj., opposes emanci- 
pation, 212. 
Harrison, Sarah, helps emanclp., 

213. 
Harrison fam. goes West, 274. 
Harrold fam. goes West, 278. 
Hart fam. goes West, 280. 
Harvey, Thomas, deputy gov. of 

N. C, 57, 58, GO; possibly a Q., 

66; ment'd, (',1. 
Harvey fam. goes West, 276, 279. 



Hasket fam. goes to S. C, 117; 
goes West, 276, 280. 

Haskett fam. goes West, 275. 

Haskius fam. goes West, 276, 
277. 

Hatcher, Benj., ment'd, 147;i. 

Hatcher fam. goes West, 273. 

Hats, to be taken off, 131. 

Hauton, Permeauus, meeting at 
ht use of, 90-91. 

Hawkii.s, Jobn. gifts of, 130. 

Hawks, Francis L., accepts reli- 
gious refugee theory, 32; on 
Glover-Cary struggle, 164; on 
Story's interview with Gary. 
75; position on " Gary Rebel- 
lion " noticed, 165; quoted, 
159??. 

Haworth fam. goes to S. C., 116; 
goes West, 277. 

Haydock fam. goes W^est, 276. 

Hayti, as place for emigration, 
228; negroes sent to, 230-231. 

Hayworth fam. goes to Tenn.. 
253. 

Heath, Sir Robert, grant to men- 
tioned. 8. 

Heaton fam. goes to S. C., 116. 

Hellam fam. goes West, 277 

Hellen fam. of N. C., 87. 

Henby fam. goes West, 274, 275. 

Henderson fam. goes to N. C, 
103, 116; goes to S. C, 116; goes 
West, 280. 

Hening, W. W., on Toleration 
Act, 149-150. 

Henley fam. goes West, 278. 

Henly fam. goes West. 283. 

Henrico Co., Va., Q. in, 74, 75, 
76, 77, 81, 82, 85, 147-148, 286; 
Q. go to N. C., 89; requires Q. 
to conform to Toleration Act, 
145, 147. 

Henrv, Patrick, on abolition of 
S., 213; writes Bill of Rights, 
154. 

Henry. William Wirt, answers 
Dr. Still^', 155??.; on Bill of 
Rights, 154-155. 

Henry Co., Ind., emigration to, 
27S'; origin of settlers of, 283. 

Hertford Co., N. C, Q. in, 88-90. 

Hester fam. goes West, 276. 

Heston, Zebulon, visits western 
ra., 24S 



Index, 



377 



Heyrick, Elizabeth, anticipated 

by Charles Osborn, 237n. 
Hiatt, George, goes to N. C, 106. 
Hiatt, John, goes to N. C, 103. 
Hiatt, .Joseph, goes to N. C, 106. 
Hiatt, Martha, goes to N. C, 103 
Hiatt, William, goes to N. C, 

103. 
Hiatt fam. goes West, 276, 277, 

279, 283; joins Manu. Soc, 239. 
Hicks fam. goes West. 275. 
Hicksites, in Va., 286; none in 

N. C, 295; statistics, 288. 320n., 

323; use of term, 288«. 
Hicksite separation, account of, 

287-289, 292; influence in north- 
em Va., 100. 
Highland Co., O., emigration to, 

274, 276, 278, 279. 
Hill, Allen, delegate to Amer. 

Col. Soc, 229n. 
Hill, Benj., goes West, 283. 
Hill, John, persecutes Q., 22-25. 
Hill, Robert, goes West, 283. 
Hill, Saihuel, imprisoned, 172. 
Hill fam. goes West, 276, 279. 
Hines fam. goes West, 276. 
Hinshaw, Benj., regulator, 182. 
Hinshaw, John, regulator, 182. 
Hinshaw fam. goes West, 276. 
Historical materials, care of by 

Q., 71, 72. 
Hitchcock fam. goes West, 277. 
Hoag, Joseph, on Q. as masters, 

229. 
Hobbs, L. L., pres. Guilford Col- 
lege, 318. 
Hobbs, Mrs. Mary M., quoted, 

139. 
Hobson fam. goes West, 275, 276. 
Hockaday fam. goes West, 274. 
Hockett fam. goes West, 276, 

279. 
Hodge fam. goes West, 272; in 

Ga., 121. 
Hodgins fam. goes to Tenu., 253; 

goes West, 278. 
Hodgson, Robert, sketch, 15-16n.; 

visits Va.. 15. 
Hodgson fam. goes West, 276, 

277. 
Hogan, William, ment'd. 256. 
Hogg, James, imprisoned, 172. 
Hoggatt, Joseph, goes to N. C, 

106. 



Hoggatt, Philip, goes to N. C, 

106. 
Hoggatt fam. goes to N. C , 103; 

goes West, 276-279. 
Holder, Christopher, sketch, IGn.; 

visits Va., 15. 
Holland, Peter, visited. 111. 
Holhind, visit of Fox, 4. 
Holllngsworth fam. goes to S. 

C, 116; goes West, 279, 280. 
Holloway fam. goes West, 273, 

274; of Va., 101. 
Hollowell, Benj., sketch, 289. 
Hollowell, John, ment'd, 76n. 
Hollowell, Thomas, writings of, 

143. 
Hollowell fam. of N. C, 87-89; 

goes West, 275, 276. 
Holme, Benjamin, visifs South, 

80. 
Holmes, Thomas, ment'd, 147. 
Holmes fam. in Va., 77. 
Homer fam. goes West, 273. 
Honey Creek M. M., emigrants 

to, 273, 276. 
Hooker, Hannah, goes to S. C, 

116. 
Hookes, Elise, ment'd, 26. 
Hooten, Eliz., sketch, 21; visits 

Va., 21. 
Hooten, Samuel, ment'd, 21. 
Hoover, Andrew, ment'd, 281. 
Hoover, David, life typical of 

history of Southern Q., 280; 

reminiscences of, 280-282. 
Hopewell M. M., Va., emigration 

to N. C, 103, 105; to tbe West, 

250, 263, 272, 278; history, 

97-100; visits new settlements, 

248. 
Hopewell Q., Q. sympathize with 

South, 304; sufferings in the 

war. 303. 
Hopkins, Reid, ment'd. 76n. 
Horn, Hem-y, visited, 90. 
Horn fam. of N. C, 87, 89; goes 

West, 276. 
Horner fam. goes West, 279. 
Horney fam. goes W^est, 278. 
Horton fam. goes West, 278. 
Hosier fam. goes West, 279. 
Hoskins, Jane, visits South, 83- 

84. 
Hoskins, Rich'd, visits South, 

52n.. 04. 



378 



Index. 



Hoskins fam. jjoes West, 27G. 
Uough fam. jroes West, 272, 283. 
Houtland, Widow, son lueut'd, 

42. 
Howard. Horton. p:oes West, 259. 
Howard. .Tames, ment'd. 76. 
Howard fain, of N. C, 87; of Va., 

77; goes West, 275. 
Howel, Thomas, ment'd. 89. 
Howell fam. goes West, 274, 278. 
Hubbard, .Tereraiah, del. to Amer. 

Col. Soc, 22J3H.; favors schools, 

300; letter to, 232; sketch, 138; 

ment'd. 139, 300. 
Hul)bard fam. goes West, 275, 

277. 278, 283; joins Manu. Soc, 

239; of Va., 77. 
Hughes, Edward, helps on m. h,, 

76. 
Hughes fam. goes West, 273. 
Huguenots, cause trouble in S. 

C, 57, 58; naturalized. 59. 
Hull. Henry, preaches in Epis. 

church. 15Gn. 
Hume. Sophia, sketch. 140-141. 
Hunicut fam. of Va.. 77. 
Hunnicutt, Sarah, married. 142. 
Hunnicutt fam. goes AVest, 274. 
Hunt, Charles, goes West, 283. 
Hunt, Nathan, slcetch, 137-138; 

ment'd, 139. 301h., 314. 
Hunt, William, goes to N. C, 

103; proi>oses to go West. 2G2; 

sketch, 137; visits Wateree, 114. 
Hunt fam. goes to N. C, 103; 

goes West, 273, 276-279. 
Husband, Hermou, autograph. 

17S».; characterization of. 181; 

disowned, 180, 181; in Whiskey 

Rebellion. 182; leads malcon- 
tents, 180; leaves N. C, 182; 

marries, 179; prosecuted, 181- 

182; publishes book, 179//.; 

sketch, 161-162; ment'd, 182/?., 

2.-iT. 
llusliaiid, Jacob L., ment'd, 17Sh. 
Husl)aiid, Joseph, turns Q., 179. 
llus])aud, William (1), sketch, 

17'.». 
Husband, William (2). sketch, 

179. 
Ilnsbaiid, William (3), disowned. 

1S2/). 
Ilussey fam., leaders in Nantuck- 
et. lOS; goes West, 276. 



Hutchins, Nich., helps on m. li., 

76. 
Hutchinson, George, visits South, 

48. 
Hyde, Edward. See Clarendon. 

Karl of. 
Hyde. Edward, effort to capture, 

165; gov. of N. C, 165; ment'd, 

IGG//. 
Hyde Co., N. C. Q. in. 87: leave, 

259. 



Illinois, emigrations to, 264, 271, 
278; no. free negroes in. 232??.; 
opposes immigration of ne- 
groes, 232; organized, 245. 

Immigration in 17 cent, charac- 
ter, 70. 

Impending Crisis, The, ment'd. 
139. 

Imperium in imperio, Q. an, 133. 

Imprisonment of Q. in Va.. 153- 
154. 

Index expurgatorius. organized. 
140. 

Indian, on swearing, 52. 

Indian incursion in Ga.. 119-120. 

Indian owners sought bv Q., 
99/f., 107/i. 

Indian War, Q. refuse to fight, 
166. 173. 

Indiana, as place of migration, 
228; emigration of Q. to, 1, 2, 
251. 260, 263, 264, 265. 269-280. 
310; opposes negro immigra- 
tion. 232. 233; no. free negroes 
in. 232//.; per cent, of Carolin- 
ians in. 2. 284; organized, 245; 
race prejudice in, 232. 

Indiana Y. M., educat. work in 
Ark.. 316; separation in. 288. 

Indian.s, fri(>ndly to Q., 1; in 
West. 245; interest manifest- 
ed in. 41. 66, 67; letter on 
I)lainne.ss, 131; prevent expan- 
sion of Ga., 119; Q. settle on 
lands of. 99?i.. 107n., 252; vis- 
ited by Fox. 39; by Story aiul 
(Jill. ()8; by Beales and Robin- 
son. 2.~»5. 

Inner Light, the. cardinal doc- 
trine of Q., 5. 

Insco fam. goes West, 280. 



Index. 



379 



Inventories of Russell and 

Bresso, 129-130. 
Iowa, omisvation to, 251. 310. 
Ireland, emisratiou from to N. 

0., 51, 103; to S. C, 114, 117h.; 

Q. help to build m. h., 317; 

spread of Q. in, 4. 
Iron, scarcity of in Ga.. 121. 
Isle of WiRht Co., Va., Q. in, 2G, 

74, 75, 89. 
Isle of Wiffht M. M., Va., action 

on S., 205. 



Jack Swamp M. M., N. C, emi- 
gration West, 262, 275; to cen- 
tral N. C, 261; history, 88-90. 

Jackson, Andrew, a type, 285; 
visited, 138. 

Jackson, Isaac, goes to N. C, 
103. 

Jackson fam. goes West, 278. 

Jacob fam. goes to S. C, 116. 

Jacobs, Isaac, ment'd, 219. 

James, Edward W., ment'd, 348. 

James fam. goes West, 273, 274, 
276; in Ga., 121. 

Janet fam. of Va., 77. 

Janney, Amos, ment'd, 98. 

Janney, Samuel M., sketch, 98n.; 
ment'd. 143m. , 

Janney fam. goes West, 272, 273; 
ment'd, 98. 

Jarvis, one, gov. of N. C. 58w. 

Jarvis, Rev. George P., cited, 53. 

Jay, Allen, inaugurates collection 
of records, 351; on economic 
condition of N. C. Q., 316; 
superintends Q. schools, 312. 

Jay, Eli, quoted on emigration 
from South, 272. 

Jay fam. goes to S. C, 116; goes 
West, 279-280. 

Jefferson. Thos., introduces bill 
for religious freedom, 156; on 
no. of Dissenters in Va., 155; 
ment'd, 213, 243. 

Jefferson Co., W. Va., Q. leave, 
100. 

Jenkins, David, ment'd, 115. 
Jenkins fam. goes West, 272, 276, 
280. 

Jennings, Samuel, ment'd, 50. 



Jerks, the, noticed, 122. 

Jessop fam. goes West, 276, 277, 

279, 283. 
Jinnett fam. goes West, 275. 
John fam. goes West, 272. 276, 

277. 
Johns, James, ment'd, 67. 
Johns, Richard, visited, 72. 
Johnson, Andrew, a type, 285. 
Johnson, James, goes to N. C, 

106. 

Johnson, John, goes to N. C, 106. 

Johnson, Sir Nathaniel, Archdale 

to, 59; enforces mil. laws 

against Q., 189; made gov. of 

Car., 158; suspended, 162; work 

of, 158. 

Johnson, Robert, goes to N. C, 

106. 
Johnson, Talton, goes to N. C, 

106. 
Johnson, William, goes to N. C, 

106. 
Johnson, William, on S. com., 

211. 
Johnson fam. goes West, 273, 
274, 276-279, 283; oJ Va., 77. 
100, 101. 
Johnston, Gabriel, loving to Q., 
141; on causes of settlements 
in N. C, 35. 
Johnston fam. goes West, 273. 
Johnston Co., N. C, Q. increase 

in, 286. 
Jones, Aaron, goes to N. C, 103. 
.Tones, Charles C, Jr., on settle- 
ment at Quaker Spring, 118. 
Jones, David, ment'd, 307«. 
Jones, Edward, persecuted, 26. 
Jones, Isaac, goes to N. C, 106. 
Jones fam. goes to N. C, 103; to 
S. C, 116, 117; to Ga., 121; 
West, 276, 278-280. 
Jones Co., N. C, Q. in, 87; leave, 

259, 286. 
Jordan, Joseph, m. h. near, 67h. 
Jordan, Joseph, sketch, 134; men- 
tioned, 135. 
Jordan, Joseph, emancipates 

slaves, 222h. 
Jordan, Justice, books to, 41. 
Jordan, Margaret, distrained, 

150. 
Jordan, Patience, ment'd, 135. 
Jordan, Richard, sketch. 135-136. 



380 



Index. 



Jordan, Robert, helps on m. h., 

7G;j. 
Jordan. Robert, sketch, 134-135; 

suffers for tithes, 150-152. 
Jordan, Thomas, on Parrot's 

schism, 28; persecuted, 26, 27. 
Jordan fam. goes West. 274, 283; 

of N. C. 77. 89; of Va., 77; 

prominence of, 134. 
Joslin, Heniy, com. for Gorges, 

54. 
Judge, Hugh, aids emancipation, 

218-219; visits South. 112-113. 
Judkins fam. goes West, 275; of 

N. C, 89. 
Julian, George W., of Q. ances- 

ti-y, 280«.; on Q. in Federal 

army, 306n.; on rank of Charles 

Osborn as anti-slavex'y pioneer, 

236n-23Sn.; ment'd, 283. 
Julian, Isaac, goes West, 283. 
Julian, Isaac H., ment'd, 2S2». 

K 

Kanawha road, course of, 246, 

248. 
Kansas, emigration from N. C., 

310. 
Kean fam. goes West, 276. 
Keaton, Henry, marriage, 127. 
Keddy, Stephen, to visit Va., 43. 
Keith, George, against slavery, 

198. 
Kellum fam. goes West, 277. 
Kelly, Samuel, ment'd, 115. 
Kelly, Samuel, Jr., goes West, 

268. 
Kelly fam. goes West, 279, 280. 

Kemp, , mentioned, 26». 

Kemp fam. of N. C.. 102. 
Kendal fam. goes Wesf, 277. 
Kendall, Thomas, goes to N. C., 

106. 
Kendall fam. goes West, 277. 
Kennedy, Jobn, assigns slaves, 

227. 
Kentucky, emigrations to Ind. 

from, 283. 
Kentucky road, course of, 246- 

247, 248. 
Kenworfby fam. goes West, 276. 
Kercheval, Samuel, quoted, 97n. 
Kersey, William, goes to N. C, 

106. 



Kersey fam. goes West, 277. 

Kershaw Co., S. C, Q. in, 95, 
114-115. 

Killey fam. goes West, 280. 

King, Miss E. T., ment'd, 316». 

King, Francis T., advances 
primary schools, 312; checks 
western emigration, 310, 311; 
hall named for at Guilford Col- 
lege, 315, 316; makes possible 
M^ork of B. A., 311; pres. of B. 
A., 311; sketch, 310-311; visits 
Amer. Y. M.'s for N. C. Q., 
315. 

King. Lawrence, visits Soiith, 
80-81. 

Kirby-Smith, Gen. Edmund, 
ment'd, 289. 

Kirk, Mary, goes to N. C, 119- 
120. 

Kirk, Tamar, goes to N. C, 119; 
killed, 120. 

Kirk fam. ment'd, 100. 

Kite, Thomas, ment'd. 136n^. 

Knight fam. goes to N. C, 103; 
goes West, 276, 277, 279. 

Knox, John, domestic troubles, 
127. 

Knox family of N. C, 89. 



Lacy fam. goes West. 272. 275. 
Ladd, William, helps on m. h., 

76. 
Ladd fam. goes West, 274; of 

Va., 77, 134. 
Lamb. Henry, goes to central N. 

C, 100. 
Lamb, Jacob, goes to central N. 

C, 106. 
Lamb, Jos., goes to central N. C, 

106. 
Lamb fam. goes to S. C, 115; 

goes West, 275. 
Lambert, John, goes to N. C, 

103. 
Lanciister, Aaron, ment'd, 222n. 
Lanojister. James, sketch of, 

38tt.; visits N. C. with Fox, 37. 
Lancaster fam. goes West, 276; 

of N. (1. 89. 
Lane family in Curies M. M., 77. 
LanglfV, James, goes to N. C, 

106. 



Index. 



381 



Lankford family of Va., 77. 
Larow fam. goes West, 274. 
Lawrance, Ricliard, ment'd, 129. 
Lawrence, Robert, meut'd, 26. 
Lawrence fam. goes West, 274; 

of N. C, 8y. 
Lawson, Jobn, on causes of set- 
tlement in N. C, 35. 
Lea fam. goes West, 274. 
Lead, Lad. See Ladd. 
Leadbetter fam. goes West, 274. 
Lee. Gen. Robert E., ment'd, 289. 
Lenoir Co., N. C. Q. in, 87. 
Leonard fam. goes West, 276. 
Lewis, Enoch, ment'd, IBln. 
Lewis, T., ment'd, 94. 
Lewis fam. goes West, 272-274, 

279, 280. 
Liberia as place of migration, 

228. 
Libraries, efforts for in Va. and 
N. C, 298-300; of Q. books, 352; 
in wills, 129-130. 
Lick Creek M. M., emigrants to, 
261, 265, 274. 275, 276, 277, 278, 
279. 
Liddal. Jobn, visits Va., 21. 
Lillington, Alexander, ment'd, 

58h. 
Lillington, John, ment'd, 27n. 
Lillington, Sarah, ment'd, 27n.. 
Limestone, Tenn., Q. at, 253, 

263. 
Lincoln, Abraham, a type, 285. 
Lindley, Thomas, goes to N. C, 

103. 
Lindley fam. goes West, 276, 

279. 
Lingager fam. goes West, 279. 
Liquors, discussed in N. C. Y. 

M., 297, 298; use of, 126-129. 
Literary work of Q., 139-143. 
Little fam. goes West, 272, 273. 
Little Reedy Island, Q. at, 253, 

254. 
Lloyd fam. goes West, 272. 
Locke, John, on religion in Fund. 

Const, of Car., 10-12. 
Lodge fam. goes West, 274. 
London Yearly Epistle on g., 199. 
Lords, House of, action on S. C. 
laws, 160; effect of declaration 
on N. C, 161. 
Lost Creek M. M., Tenn., emi- 
gration to, 265; Q. at, 252, 253. 



Lotteries, Q. engage in, 128. 

Loudoun Co., Va., Q. in, 83, 98- 
100, 286. 

Tx>uisa Co., Va., Q. leave, 286; 
Q. in, 320; statistics, 323. 

Lovcjoy, Elijah P., ment'd, 238n.. 

Low fam. goes West, 276. 

Lowe, Emmanuel, boat restored 
to, 166h.; in " Cary Rebellion," 
166; marries dau. of Archdale, 
60; tried by Q., 166; ment'd, 
74, 129. 

Ludwell, Philip, gov. gen. of 
Car., 57, 58rt. 

Lumbroso, Jacob, pushed by Q., 
14?i. 

Lundy, Benj., advises sending 
negroes to Hayti, 230; agent 
for The Philanthropist, 23Sn.; 
influence on Manu. Soc, 239; 
on no. of Abolition Societies, 
241«-.; preceded by Charles Os- 
born, 23Qn.; publishes The Gen- 
ius, 23S».; sketch, 239n. 

Lundy fam. goes West. 279. 

Lupton fam. goes West, 272, 273. 

Lynch, Charles, sketch, 101. 

Lynch, Charles, Jr., founds 
Lynchburg, 101». 

Lynch, John, founds Lynchburg, 
lOln. 

Lynchburg, founders of, lOln. 

Lynch fam. goes West, 274; of 
Va.. 101. 

Lynch law, origin of term, 101. 

McClure fam. goes West, 280. 
McCool fam. goes West, 280; 

goes to S. C, 117. 
McDowell, James, Ji'., urges 

emancipation, 243. 
McDuflae Co., Ga., Q. in, 118. 
Mace fam. goes West, 275. 
Mace family of N. C, 87. 
McKay fam. goes West, 273. 
Mackie, Josias, licensed, 147. 
McKinney fam. goes West, 278. 
McLean, C. M., quoted, 294. 
• McLean, J. R., aids Q., 305. 
McLean fam. goes West, 279. 
Macocomocock River, ment'd, 

38, 39». 
Macon, Fort, Q. help to build, 

195ra. 



382 



Index. 



McPherson fam. goes West, 272, 

273, 279. 
Macy, David, goes to N. C, 108. 
Macy, Enoch, goes to N. C, 108. 
Macy, .Tothro. goes to N. C, 108. 
Macy, Joseph, goes to N. C, 108. 
Macy, Matthew, goes to N. C, 

108. 
Macy, Nathaniel, goes to N. C, 

108. 
Macy, Obed. on migration to N. 

C, 107. 
Macy, Paul, goes to N. C, 108. 
Macy fam. goes to Tenn., 253; 

goes West, 274, 27G-278. 
Maddock, Joseph, a malcontent, 
ISO; a representative, 181; Ga. 
grants land to, 118, 181; men- 
tioned, 119. 
Maddox, Mary, meut'd. 147. 
Maddox fam. goes West, 274, 

280; of Va., 77. 
Madison, James, champions Jef- 
ferson's bill, 15G; ment'd, 213. 
Magadee road, course of. 247. 
Magohe family in Va., 77. 
Maiuo, Gorges and Mass., 53, 54. 
Makamie, Francis, licensed, 147. 
Maid, Elizabeth, helps oa m. h., 

7G. 
Manikin Town settlement, vis- 
ited by Fothergill and King, 
81; ment'd, 150. 
Manumission. See Emancipation. 
Manumission Intelligencer, men- 
tioned, 239». 
Manumission Society of N. C., 
abolitionists withdraw from, 
238; addresses to religious 
bodies, 235; branches, 234-235, 
238, 239, 240; dissolution. 241; 
di.sunion in, 236, 237; history 
and work of, 234-241; influence 
of lAmdy, 239; little accom- 
plished by, 238; members, 235- 
238; not distinctively Q., 234; 
nuiuhers, 240, 241«.*; place of 
meeting. 2:\T); ])rogress of abol- 
ition. 2:59; sends materials to 
I.uudy, 240; sends memorial to 
Congress, 241; tries to enforce 
lawsi ijlf'ainst kidnapi)in^, 238; 
the yc^vk "[fV ''="■''* *>sborn, 



Manumission Society of Tenn., 
size, 239; ment'd, 235, 236, 237»., 
23Sn. 
Manumission Society of Va., or- 
ganized, 239. 
Mardab, ,[ohu, helps on m. h., 

76«. 
Maremoon fam. goes West, 275. 
Marine fam. goes West, 279. 
Marlborough Co., S. C, Q. in, 95. 

113-114. 
Marmaduke fam. goes West, 280, 
Marriage customs, 126. 
Marriages, conditions, 168-169; 
disorderly, 127; gov. of feast, 
127; trouble over second, 127; 
superfluities at, 126. 
Mari-ying out of Society, Story 

preaches against, 67. 
Marshall, Thomas, urges emanci- 
pation, 243. 
Marshall fam. goes to Tenn., 253; 

goes West, 270. 
Marsh ill, John, a malcontent, 

180. 
Marshill, WiUiam, a malcontent, 

180; a representative, 181. 
Martin, F. X., warps history to 

prove refugee theory, 32, 33n. 
Martin, James, visits South, 48. 
Maryland, emigration to N. C, 
96, 103-105, 108; to S. C, 110; 
to the West, 283; to Va., 97; 
Nicholites organized in, 109; Q. 
emigration reaches, 70, 96, 97; 
Q. in, 29; Q. on affairs in N. C, 
46; S. in 199; visit of Chalkley, 
74; of Dilwurth and Gove, 63; 
of R. Hoskins, 52«.; of Hoskins 
and Churchman, 83-84; of 
Hutchinson and Martin, 48; of 
Hodman and Caldwell, 73«. 
Mason & Dixon, meut'd, 97. 
Massachusetts, opinions of Q., 5, 
6; Q. first appear in, 5, 13; Q. 
hanged in, 6; surrenders and 
retakes Maine, 54; Tompkins 
and Ambrose persecuted, 22. 
Massic fam. of Va., 77. 
Masson, David, quoted, 2. 
IMather. Cotton, ment'd, 6. 
Mathews fam. of N. C, 102. 
Matthews, James, regulator, 182. 
Matthews. S.. ment'd, 15. 
Matthews, William, sketch, 134. 



